Document - Worcestershire County Council

Environmental Services
Transport Planning
Worcestershire’s
Local Transport Plan
2006 / 2011
www.worcestershire.gov.uk
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

PREFACE
In July 2005, Worcestershire County Council published its Provisional Local
Transport Plan for 2006-11, setting out the proposed future transport strategy for the
County.
Much has happened since then. We have seen the exciting re-launch of the
Worcester North Park and Ride bus services through the Project Express initiative,
which has been very popular with users, and this can be seen as the future of bus
travel across the County. We have also seen the seven local authorities within
Worcestershire come together to agree the introduction of a countywide
concessionary travel scheme from April 2006. This has been the first fruit of the Joint
Integrated Passenger Transport Forum, which has brought together senior officers
and Members from each authority with a single aim – to improve the service we
provide to our residents.
The County Council has also entered into new Contracts for its term consultancy and
highways maintenance services, introducing closer partnership working between
Council, consultancy and Contractor staff. I believe that these arrangements will
bring many benefits to Worcestershire, and will result in a more efficient delivery of
the schemes and strategies contained in this Local Transport Plan.
The seven local authorities have also combined, with many other public, private and
voluntary sector organisations, in the Worcestershire Partnership. The County
Council gratefully recognises the role played by Partnership members in the
development of this Plan. The Local Area Agreement developed through the
Partnership will be an important influence on the further development of the transport
policies contained within the Plan.
We face a number of challenges if the Local Transport Plan is to be fully effective.
Not least of these will be the limited financial resources available to the Council.
Many of the elements of the strategy will rely on revenue funding to back up the
capital investment available through the LTP budget. This will fund activities as
diverse as road safety training, marketing of bus services, or advising schools on the
development of Travel Plans. In addition, significant revenue resources are invested
in the support of non-commercial bus services, and in the maintenance of our
highways, footways and public rights of way.
However, the Council is likely to face a number of years with relatively low financial
settlements from Government, and careful project management will be required to
ensure that limited funding stretches a long way. I am confident that we will rise to
this challenge, and will build on the successes of the first Local Transport Plan over
the next five years.
John Smith (Cabinet Member with responsibility for the Environment)

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
1 ABOUT THE PLAN ...................................................................................................7
1.1 Why Produce the Plan?.....................................................................................8
1.2 Developing the Plan ...........................................................................................8
1.2.1 Main Influences ...........................................................................................8
1.3 Consultation Process .........................................................................................9
1.4 What Happens Next?.......................................................................................10
2 THE VISION ............................................................................................................11
3 STRATEGY INFLUENCES ....................................................................................15
3.1 Worcestershire Overview................................................................................16
3.2 Regional Context..............................................................................................17
3.2.1 Background................................................................................................17
3.2.2 Key RSS Policies.......................................................................................17
3.2.3 Regional Transport Strategy ......................................................................19
3.2.4 Regional Housing Strategy ........................................................................19
3.2.5 RSS Review ...............................................................................................20
3.3 Worcestershire Partnership............................................................................21
3.4 Worcestershire Economic Strategy 2004-14..................................................25
3.5 Travel to Work Patterns .................................................................................27
3.6 Housing .............................................................................................................32
3.6.1.1 Sustainable and Accessible Development .............................................32
3.6.1.2 Affordability ..........................................................................................33
3.6.1.3 Future Housing Needs ...........................................................................34
3.7 Tourism.............................................................................................................35
3.7.1.1 Regional Visitor Economy Strategy ......................................................35
3.7.1.2 Major Visitor Attractions.......................................................................35
3.7.1.3 Olympic Games - 2012..........................................................................37
3.8 Education..........................................................................................................38
3.8.1.1 University of Worcester.........................................................................38
3.8.1.2 Further Education ..................................................................................39
3.8.1.3 Schools...................................................................................................39
3.9 River Crossings ................................................................................................40
3.10 Health................................................................................................................42
3.10.1.1 Acute Care Facilities..........................................................................42
3.10.1.2 Primary Care Trusts...........................................................................42
3.10.1.3 Hereford and Worcester Ambulance Trust........................................42
3.10.1.4 Transport Issues .................................................................................43
3.10.1.5 Summary............................................................................................43
3.11 Environment.....................................................................................................44
3.11.1 Air Quality .................................................................................................44
3.11.2 Worcestershire Climate Change Strategy ..................................................45
3.11.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment.........................................................46
3.12 Worcestershire in 2020....................................................................................47
3.13 Cross Boundary Issues ....................................................................................53
3.14 Strategic Transport Network..........................................................................54
1

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
3.14.1 Strategic Highway Network.......................................................................55
3.14.2 Strategic Rail Network...............................................................................59
3.14.3 Air Travel...................................................................................................62
3.15 Consultation Responses...................................................................................62
3.15.1 Public Consultation....................................................................................62
3.15.2 Government Feedback ...............................................................................63
3.16 Summary ..........................................................................................................64
4 THE STRATEGY......................................................................................................65
4.1 Strategy Overview ...........................................................................................66
4.2 ACCESSIBILITY ............................................................................................69
4.2.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................70
4.2.2 Priorities for Investment ............................................................................71
4.2.3 Target Groups ............................................................................................71
4.2.4 Accessibility Mapping ...............................................................................73
4.2.4.1 Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership ..............................................78
4.2.4.2 Accessibility and Land Use Planning ....................................................79
4.2.4.3 Accessibility and Passenger Transport Networks..................................80
4.2.4.4 Accessibility and LTP2 Delivery...........................................................80
4.2.5 Mobility Issues...........................................................................................80
4.2.6 Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy ...................................................82
4.2.6.1 Vision.....................................................................................................82
4.2.6.2 Partnership Working..............................................................................87
4.2.6.3 Bus Stops ...............................................................................................89
4.2.6.4 Bus Priority............................................................................................90
4.2.6.5 Other Bus Infrastructure ........................................................................91
4.2.6.6 Information / Marketing.........................................................................92
4.2.6.7 Community Transport............................................................................92
4.2.6.8 Concessionary Fares ..............................................................................93
4.2.6.9 Taxis ......................................................................................................94
4.2.6.10 Coaches..............................................................................................95
4.2.7 Rail Strategy ..............................................................................................97
4.2.7.1 Rail Industry Structure...........................................................................99
4.2.7.2 Route Utilisation Strategies .................................................................100
4.2.7.3 Regional Planning Assessment............................................................100
4.2.7.4 Franchise Changes ...............................................................................101
4.2.7.5 Stations ................................................................................................102
4.2.7.6 Station Improvements..........................................................................104
4.2.7.7 Infrastructure improvements................................................................106
4.2.7.8 Cross-Boundary Schemes....................................................................107
4.2.8 Economic Strategy Support .....................................................................108
4.2.8.1 Market Towns Transportation Initiative..............................................108
4.2.8.2 Tourism................................................................................................109
4.2.9 Sustainable Travel Initiatives...................................................................110
4.2.9.1 Walking Schemes ................................................................................110
4.2.9.2 Cycling Schemes..................................................................................112
4.2.9.3 Quiet Lanes..........................................................................................115
4.2.9.4 Rights Of Way Improvement Plan.......................................................117
4.2.9.5 Employer Travel Plans.........................................................................122
4.2.9.6 School Travel Plans .............................................................................124
4.2.9.7 Motorcycling........................................................................................127
4.2.9.8 Freight..................................................................................................128
2

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4.3 CONGESTION ..............................................................................................131
4.3.1 Tackling Congestion................................................................................132
4.3.1.1 Managing Demand...............................................................................135
4.3.1.2 Accommodating Demand ....................................................................136
4.3.1.3 Parking Strategy...................................................................................136
4.3.1.4 Intelligent Transport Systems ..............................................................137
4.3.1.5 Network Management..........................................................................140
4.4 ROAD SAFETY.............................................................................................143
4.4.1 Engineering..............................................................................................145
4.4.2 Education .................................................................................................146
4.4.2.1 Schools.................................................................................................146
4.4.2.2 Driver Training ....................................................................................147
4.4.2.3 Promotions and Publicity.....................................................................148
4.4.3 Speed Management..................................................................................148
4.4.3.1 Speed Limits ........................................................................................148
4.4.3.2 West Mercia Safety Camera Partnership .............................................149
4.4.3.3 Speed Awareness Training ..................................................................150
4.4.4 Minor Schemes ........................................................................................150
4.5 AIR QUALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT ...........................................153
4.5.1 Air Quality ...............................................................................................154
4.5.2 Worcestershire Climate Change Strategy ................................................154
4.5.3 Fleet Management / Fuel Policy ..............................................................155
4.5.4 Strategic Environmental Assessment.......................................................157
4.5.5 Transport-related Noise ...........................................................................159
4.6 AREA STRATEGIES - Bromsgrove ...........................................................161
4.6.1 Bromsgrove Town Centre........................................................................162
4.6.2 Bromsgrove Railway Station ...................................................................163
4.6.3 M42 Junction 1 ........................................................................................164
4.6.4 Longbridge...............................................................................................165
4.7 AREA STRATEGIES – Malvern Hills........................................................167
4.7.1 Malvern....................................................................................................168
4.7.1.1 Malvern Railway Stations....................................................................169
4.7.2 Tenbury Wells Area.................................................................................170
4.7.3 Upton-upon-Severn Area.........................................................................170
4.7.4 Malvern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) .................171
4.8 AREA STRATEGIES - Redditch.................................................................173
4.8.1 Redditch Bus Quality Partnership............................................................174
4.8.2 Abbey Stadium Development..................................................................175
4.8.3 Community Safety Strategy.....................................................................175
4.8.4 A435 Studley Bypass...............................................................................176
4.9 AREA STRATEGIES - Worcester ..............................................................177
4.9.1 Worcester Sustainable Travel Town........................................................179
4.9.2 Project Express ........................................................................................181
4.9.3 Worcestershire Parkway ..........................................................................185
4.9.4 A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road....................................................186
4.9.5 Worcester City Centre .............................................................................188
4.9.6 Worcester Transportation Study ..............................................................189
4.10 AREA STRATEGIES - Wychavon..............................................................191
4.10.1 Evesham...................................................................................................192
4.10.2 Pershore ...................................................................................................194
3

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4.10.3 Keytec Industrial Estate Link Road.........................................................194
4.10.4 Droitwich .................................................................................................194
4.10.5 Vale of Evesham Freight Quality Partnership .........................................195
4.10.6 Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty .......................................195
4.11 AREA STRATEGIES – Wyre Forest ..........................................................197
4.11.1 Kidderminster ..........................................................................................198
4.11.2 Stourport Road Employment Corridor ....................................................199
4.11.3 Kidderminster Railway Station................................................................200
4.11.4 Bewdley ...................................................................................................201
4.11.5 Stourport-on-Severn.................................................................................202
4.11.6 Wyre Forest Bus Quality Partnership ......................................................203
4.11.7 A456 / A449 Trunk Roads.......................................................................203
4.11.8 Wyre Forest Schools Review...................................................................204
4.12 ASSET MANAGEMENT..............................................................................205
4.12.1 Introduction..............................................................................................206
4.12.1.1 Highways and Footways..................................................................206
4.12.1.2 Footpaths, Cyclepaths and Rights of Way.......................................207
4.12.1.3 Bridges and Structures.....................................................................207
4.12.1.4 Streetlighting....................................................................................207
4.12.1.5 Road Signs and Street Furniture ......................................................207
4.12.1.6 Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings ........................................207
4.12.1.7 Public Transport Infrastructure........................................................208
4.12.1.8 Funding ............................................................................................208
4.12.2 Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) ...........................................209
4.12.2.1 Programme of Work ........................................................................209
4.12.2.2 Baseline Data Collection and Highway Condition Monitoring.......210
4.12.2.3 Linkage with Other Service Areas...................................................210
4.12.2.4 Overall Objectives ...........................................................................211
4.12.2.5 Bridges and structures......................................................................211
4.12.2.6 Streetlighting....................................................................................214
4.12.2.7 Road Signs / Markings / Street Furniture ........................................216
4.12.2.8 New Development ...........................................................................217
5 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................219
5.1 Introduction....................................................................................................220
5.2 LTP2 Funding – Planning Guidelines..........................................................220
5.2.1 Indicative Allocations..............................................................................220
5.2.2 Integrated Transport Block ......................................................................221
5.2.3 Structural Maintenance Block .................................................................221
5.2.4 Road Safety Planning Guideline..............................................................221
5.2.5 Indicative Five Year Programme.............................................................222
5.2.6 County Council Funding..........................................................................222
5.2.7 Supplementary Funding...........................................................................224
5.2.8 Prioritisation of Schemes.........................................................................224
5.3 Transport Innovation Fund ..........................................................................226
5.4 Major Schemes...............................................................................................227
5.4.1 Major Schemes included in LTP2 ...........................................................227
5.4.1.1 Worcestershire Parkway Station..........................................................227
5.4.1.2 A441 Bordesley Bypass.......................................................................227
5.4.2 Major Scheme bids to be developed within LTP2...................................227
5.4.2.1 Worcester Transportation Strategy ......................................................227
4

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
5.4.2.2 Wyre Forest Transportation Strategy...................................................228
5.4.2.3 River Bridges .......................................................................................228
5.4.3 Risk Management ....................................................................................228
5.4.3.1 Bordesley Bypass.................................................................................228
5.4.3.2 Worcestershire Parkway ......................................................................229
5.4.3.3 A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road................................................229
5.4.3.4 Project Express ....................................................................................230
5.4.3.5 Other Schemes .....................................................................................230
5.4.3.6 Staff Resources ....................................................................................230
5.4.3.7 Financial Resources .............................................................................230
5.4.3.8 Summary..............................................................................................231
5.5 Scheme Delivery.............................................................................................232
5.5.1 Partnering Arrangements .........................................................................232
5.5.2 Project Management ................................................................................234
6 MONITORING .......................................................................................................237
6.1 Targets and Indicators ..................................................................................238
APPENDIX ONE
APPENDIX TWO
GOVERNMENT FEEDBACK ON PROVISIONAL LTP2
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT
APPENDIX THREE LTP2 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
APPENDIX FOUR
APPENDIX FIVE
APPENDIX SIX
LTP2 FRAMEWORK APPRAISAL
FINANCE FORMS
MONITORING REPORT
5

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
6

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
1 ABOUT THE PLAN
7

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
1.1 WHY PRODUCE THE PLAN?
The Local Transport Plan for 2006-11 (LTP2) sets out Worcestershire’s transport
strategy for the next five years, as well as identifying major longer-term
transportation pressures upon the County. It also sets transportation needs
within the County in the context of regional and national transport policies, and of
other public services within the County such as education, social services, health,
economic development and cultural activities.
LTP2 is a statutory document, and whilst it has been produced by Worcestershire
County Council in its role as Local Highway Authority, there has been significant
input from the Council’s public, private and voluntary sector partners. The
contribution of these partners is gratefully acknowledged.
Government has produced a wide range of guidance relating to the preparation of
the LTP2 strategy, and links to these documents are available through the LTP2
page on the County Council website (www.worcestershire.gov.uk/ltp).
It is obviously good practice to publish the forward strategy for transportation
within Worcestershire regardless of the statutory requirement, as it presents the
public, and public, private and voluntary sector organisations, with a clear vision
on the way in which the transport needs of the County will be met.
1.2 DEVELOPING THE PLAN
1.2.1 Main Influences
A significant influence on the preparation of LTP2 was the guidance issued by
Government, which gave a clear outline of what the LTP2 strategy should
include. This required a focus on four shared priorities for transport agreed by
local and central Government, these being:
• Improving Accessibility
• Improving Air Quality
• Tackling Congestion
• Improving Road Safety
Therefore, the document is structured in a way that clearly sets out the policies
and proposals grouped under these four main headings, with a fifth section
covering Asset Management. There are also District based strategies as outlined
below to reflect local issues.
However, of equal importance was the review of all major policies and strategies
relating to the provision of all services across Worcestershire, notably the
Community Strategy and other corporate plans. These external influences on the
LTP2 strategy have been summarised within Chapter 3 of LTP2, which sets the
background to the development of the overall LTP2 strategy.
Potential changes in land use patterns across Worcestershire in the next five
years have been identified from Local Plans prepared by District Councils, and
through consultation with relevant partners. Similarly, local transport issues and
8

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
needs have been identified through the consultation process. With such a
diverse range of issues applying across Worcestershire, it was felt important to
include specific transport strategies outlining the main LTP2 proposals for each
District area, to complement the countywide strategies, which have been grouped
around the Shared Priorities for Transport.
The LTP2 process has also been influenced by the outcome of Best Value
Reviews into various transportation service areas during the first LTP period
(2001-06). The primary outcome of these reviews has been the re-structuring of
the LTP delivery mechanisms, forming the structures outlined in Chapter 5 for
scheme delivery.
Another important area of work was the extensive consultation process, which
sought to engage all sectors of the community in the development of the LTP2
strategy. This process is described below, with the headline results being
presented in Chapter 3.
1.3 CONSULTATION PROCESS
The process of preparing LTP2 started in September 2004 and has involved a
wide-ranging consultation. The programme of work is outlined below:
• September – December 2004: Phase One consultation involving meetings
with a wide range of organisations including the eight Local Strategic
Partnerships (LSPs) operating within the County, the umbrella Worcestershire
Partnership, District Councils, and other public and private sector
organisations. The objective of this work was to gain an understanding of
transport issues and priorities across the County viewed from a wide range of
perspectives. This phase also involved transport data analysis, and a review
of all relevant policy documents affecting transport needs within
Worcestershire.
• February 2005: Publication of the draft LTP2 strategy for consultation.
• February – April 2005: Phase Two consultation, involving public
exhibitions, further meetings with interested organisations, publication of an
LTP2 article and questionnaire in the Worcestershire Beacon (the County
Council newspaper distributed to all households), publication of the draft
LTP2 on the County Council website, and attendance at LSP, District and
Town Council meetings.
• July 2005: Submission of Provisional LTP2 to Government.
• September – December 2005: Phase Three consultation on the
Provisional LTP2 strategy. Effectively a repeat of the Phase Two
consultation, including further articles in the County Council newspaper,
public meetings and workshops, on-line features and a questionnaire on the
LTP page of the County Council website, and with copies of the Summary
Provisional LTP2 document issued to a wide range of organisations for
comment.
• March 2006: Submission of Final LTP2 to Government.
Early engagement with the Local Strategic Partnerships was absolutely crucial to
this process, as these bring together representatives from the public, private,
voluntary and community sectors with an interest in each area of Worcestershire.
9

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
This enabled a picture of local transport priorities across the County to be
developed early in the LTP2 process.
In total, approximately 900 representations have been made during the
development of LTP2, either through returned questionnaires, or direct letters and
e-mails. The majority of these have been from individual members of the public,
with other comments received from LSPs and other organisations. All responses
have been published within the LTP2 Consultation Report which has been
published on the County Council’s website (www.worcestershire.gov.uk/ltp).
These representations have been carefully considered in the preparation of this
LTP2 strategy, although it is recognised that not every respondent will be content
with the results. The often opposing views submitted during the consultation, and
the limited budgets available for LTP2 implementation, mean that it will be
impossible to please everyone!
The result is intended to be a balanced transport strategy meeting the
requirements of Worcestershire residents, businesses and visitors, and making
efficient use of those limited resources available for investment in transport within
the County. Comments on any aspect of the LTP2 strategy, or requests for an
update on its implementation, can be made through the website or by e-mail to
ltp2@worcestershire.gov.uk.
1.4 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The work does not stop with the submission of the LTP2 to Government in March
2006. Implementation of the LTP2 strategy will involve:
• The development and implementation of a wide range of transport projects,
• A great deal of partnership working to deliver the strategies contained in this
document,
• Influencing the general development of a range of services and land use
developments across Worcestershire to deliver transport benefits,
• Constructing transport infrastructure.
There are also a number of areas of ongoing work, and elements of the LTP2
strategy will further evolve during the 2006-11 period. These include the
following:
• Accessibility Strategy
• Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
• Rights of Way Improvement Plan
• Worcester Transportation Study
• Wyre Forest Transportation Study
• Transport Asset Management Plan
In addition, implementation of the LTP2 strategy will be constantly monitored, with
those areas of the strategy that are not shown to be effective being kept under
review and adjusted as necessary. The Monitoring Strategy described in Chapter
6 will be crucial in this respect.
10

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
2 THE VISION
11

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
The overall vision of the LTP2 strategy is:
To deliver a transport system within Worcestershire that is safe to use, and
which allows people to easily access the facilities that they need for their
day-to-day life in a sustainable and healthy way
This vision for LTP2 is consistent with the longer-term strategy for the County,
which is encompassed within the Community Strategy and Corporate Plan. It
recognises that transport is almost always a means to an end. With the
exception of specific leisure journeys (for example a trip on the Severn Valley
Railway) the vast majority of journeys have a specific purpose such as travelling
to or from work, school, shopping, the hospital or going on a night out in town.
Table 2.1 sets out the core principles behind this vision.
It is recognised that many of the transport issues faced in Worcestershire will not
be resolved within the LTP2 period, and some elements of the LTP2 strategy are
aimed at putting the right conditions in place to meet the longer-term needs of the
County. This strategic approach recognises that transport has a major role to
play in the delivery of many other strategies, often the responsibility of other
agencies, and that these other strategies will be reviewed and amended to
different timetables to that of LTP2.
If the LTP2 strategy is to be seen as a success, it will need to contribute to the
achievement of the following core objectives:
• Ensuring that people have access to key services at reasonable cost, in
reasonable time, and with reasonable ease, and in a way that promotes better
health for all.
• To have a world-class passenger transport network that meets the needs of
the people of Worcestershire in all their journeys, including work, education,
health, and leisure.
• Worcestershire will be a County with safe, cohesive, healthy and inclusive
communities, a strong and diverse economy and a valued and cherished
environment.
• The procurement of a transportation system that will support the development
of Worcester into a first class University City with a vibrant visitor economy.
• The refinement of the transport strategy that will be necessary to allow
Worcestershire to meet its longer-term contribution to the well-being of the
West Midlands Region.
• Achieving the most efficient use of resources to deliver the LTP2 strategy,
including maximisation of funding from external sources, getting excellent
levels of service from existing assets through the use of efficient management
systems, and obtaining value for money when procuring transport schemes
through robust business systems.
12

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
TABLE 2.1 – VISION STATEMENT
• To support the unique diversity and character of Worcestershire by delivering an
efficient, safe and fair transport system that meets the needs of all travellers and allows
the easy movement of goods - good transport infrastructure and services are essential for
a successful society, a thriving economy and an attractive environment.
• To consider all appropriate solutions to transport problems and catering for all
modes of transport - it is clear that there is no single solution to transport problems in
Worcestershire, nor is there a single mode of transport that can deliver the solutions.
Only by bringing the different solutions and modes together into a system of integrated
transport will we be able to address the transport problems of Worcestershire.
• To work in partnership to deliver LTP2, and recognise that greater benefits can be
achieved by working with all agencies that influence transport behaviour - LTP2 is only
one of the mechanisms through which the vision can be achieved, and we recognise that
success will only truly be achieved through partnerships with other public and private
sector organisations, as well as by forging strong links with other strategies.
• To contribute towards meeting the regional aspirations for the West Midlands -
Worcestershire is not an island, and travel within the County does not stop at County
boundaries. There is a high level of interaction with neighbouring authorities across the
West Midlands and beyond, and key elements of the national road and rail networks pass
through Worcestershire. Liaison with neighbouring transport authorities within the West
Midlands and the South-west Regions, as well as with those agencies responsible for the
national network, will be crucial to the delivery of the LTP2 strategy.
• To deliver improvements against all of the four shared priorities for transport
agreed by central and local government – these being, in order of priority identified
through the consultation process, improving accessibility, tackling congestion, improving
road safety, and improving air quality..
• To ensure the LTP2 investment programme provides value for money and is
underpinned by a robust and data-led approach to prioritisation of schemes – the LTP2
strategy has been developed using a wide range of data analysis, and robust monitoring
will take place to ensure that the schemes that are progressed do offer value for money.
Transportation studies programmed for 2006/07 will ensure that the preparatory work for
LTP3 (2011-16) and beyond is completed sufficiently early in the LTP2 period to allow a
reasonable lead-in time for the preparation of major transportation projects.
• To recognise, and respond to, the wider impacts of transport – in particular we must
seek to ensure the environmental impacts of our actions are minimised, that quality of life
is enhanced particularly for the most vulnerable sectors of our community, and that we
promote healthy travel that will contribute to the long-term health of our population.
• To promote sustainable development, and ensure economic success is not limited by
transport availability – in particular to support the Regional Economic Strategy, the
delivery of the Central Technology Belt, and supporting regeneration in those areas with
the greatest degree of need.
• To continue to consult the public at every stage of the transport delivery process,
and to continue to improve our performance through challenging the way transport
schemes are prepared and delivered – transport is a dynamic subject, with public
opinions and views rapidly changing. We must seek to embrace this and recognise
change as it happens, and seek to influence
• To monitor and review our progress and challenge the way we work, ensuring our
partners are kept informed on how the LTP2 is progressing – not everything we do will be
right first time. We must therefore learn from how effective our strategies are, monitor
carefully whether each scheme delivered meets its objectives, and whether collectively
the strategy is helping to achieve our vision.
13

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
14

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
3 STRATEGY INFLUENCES
15

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
3.1 WORCESTERSHIRE OVERVIEW
Worcestershire is a diverse County to the South of the West Midlands
conurbation. It has a population of 542,238 (2001 figure) that is forecast to grow
at a rate of 0.21% per annum over the LTP2 period. This means that by 2011,
the population will have risen to 554,814.
The highest rate of growth will be in the 65+ age band, which will influence future
transport needs. Health issues arising from an ageing population mean that an
increasing reliance upon passenger transport for personal mobility is likely, which
in a County like Worcestershire will place greater pressure upon the passenger
transport network.
Of particular importance is the trend that older people are more likely to live in the
more rural areas of the County, where the passenger transport network is more
limited, as factors such as house prices make it difficult for younger people to
move into such areas. Therefore, those people who are often most likely to
become reliant on passenger transport for their transport needs are likely to be
living in those areas more poorly served. These issues are explored in more
detail as part of the Accessibility Strategy.
Economic activity rates for Worcestershire’s population are relatively high, with
83% of the working age population being active, equating to 272,000 people
(2002 figures). With an unemployment rate of 2.2% (January 2006), which is
lower than the regional and national averages, Worcestershire’s working
population is relatively well placed. The location of the County, with relatively
easy access to many employment opportunities, does mean that work journeys
will not simply be restricted to the local transport network, but will often involve
longer journeys both within the West Midlands and beyond. This is partially
balanced by Worcestershire having an above average level of home-workers
amongst its working population.
Worcestershire’s population generally have a high standard quality of life, with
80% of residents feeling that they enjoy a good lifestyle (Source: Community
Strategy for Worcestershire). However, there are areas of the County that are
identified as having a poorer quality of life, with a number of wards being included
within the top 10% nationally when indicators of deprivation are evaluated.
Travel within Worcestershire is influenced by a range of factors including the
proximity of the County to the West Midlands conurbation, the rural nature of
much of the County, and the medium sized towns and cities that house the
majority of the County’s population. A range of strategic transport routes cross
the County, including the M5 and M42 motorways and the main railway line
linking Birmingham with Bristol and the South-west. The River Severn forms a
significant barrier to east-west movement across the County, whilst its tributaries,
the Rivers Avon and Teme, also have limited crossing points concentrating traffic
movements onto small sections of the network.
The County has no single dominant urban area. Worcester is the largest
settlement, and is the only one of the main towns to be a net importer of workers
(in other words, more people travel into the city to work there than commute from
the city to work elsewhere). This partly reflects its status as the County Town, the
number of larger employers based in the city, its status as a University City, and
16

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
its greater distance from competing employment centres. The other main towns
within the County not only compete with Worcester, but also have significant
commuting flows into neighbouring Counties, notably to the West Midlands
conurbation for the North Worcestershire towns.
Worcestershire also has large rural areas that, particularly to the West of the
River Severn, become increasingly isolated. The rural nature of the County plays
an important role in the high quality of life experienced by residents, but can also
form an important part of the economy, either through the agricultural businesses
located in the Vale of Evesham or through visitors to attractions such as the
Malvern Hills.
The remainder of this chapter provides greater detail on the County, its role within
the West Midlands region, and the main influences on the transport strategy that
has been developed within LTP2.
3.2 REGIONAL CONTEXT
3.2.1 Background
The Regional Spatial Strategy for the West Midlands (RSS), published in June
2004, has established a vision of an economically successful, outward looking
and adaptable region, with diverse and distinctive cities, towns, sub-regions and
communities. Worcestershire is one of those sub-regions and LTP2 is one of the
strategies that will contribute to delivering the regional vision within the County.
The overall vision within RSS concerning transport is that the West Midlands will
be a Region:
“With an efficient network of integrated transport facilities and services
which meet the needs of both individuals and the business community in
the most sustainable way”.
Delivery of an efficient transport network will require Worcestershire to meet one
of the four challenges identified in RSS; namely, the modernisation of its share of
the region’s transport infrastructure. In turn, an efficient transport network will
make an important contribution to meeting two other RSS challenges:
• Rural renaissance, and;
• The diversification and modernisation of the region’s economy.
The ultimate aim of RSS is to create a region made up of a dynamic network of
places, all important in their own right and with distinctive characteristics, but with
reinforcing economic, cultural and social functions. For the region to develop in
this way, it is also vital that it develops as a “connected” region with these
economic, cultural and social linkages supported by improvements in accessibility
and mobility. This is a key theme embodied within the RSS that Worcestershire’s
LTP2 can help to deliver.
3.2.2 Key RSS Policies
For Worcestershire, the key policies within RSS that the LTP2 strategy needs to
support are:
17

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
• The city of Worcester will form the sub-Regional focus for development
within the County beyond 2011 (Policy CF2).
• The development of the Central Technology Belt (CTB) is the major
economic strategy policy for the County, and should provide a focus for
transport improvements especially where these would assist accessibility to /
from Regeneration Zones. This identifies Bromsgrove, Droitwich,
Worcester and Malvern as nodes for the promotion of high technology
industry, along with sites within Birmingham that are easily reached from
Worcestershire. (Policy PA3; Policy PA7).
• The construction of a Parkway Station at Worcester is identified as an
element of the strategic Park and Ride strategy for the West Midlands. As
well as fulfilling this regional role, such a station would greatly improve access
to the national rail network for Worcestershire, thereby supporting the ability
of Worcester to meet its sub-regional role (Policy T6).
• Kidderminster and Redditch are recognised as local centres where
economic regeneration policies and programmes should be promoted, and
where, along with Worcester, the focus for major retail, leisure and office
developments within the County will be placed (Policy UR2, Policy PA11).
• The north western part of the County lies within the Rural Regeneration
Zone (RRZ), and improved transport will have a key role to play in improving
access to jobs and services (including education and training) for local
residents within the RRZ (Policy RR2).
• RSS also identifies market towns (settlements with a population between
2,000 and 20,000) as vital to rural renaissance, and LTP2 seeks to recognise
this by promoting transport improvements to ensure access to local facilities
(Policy RR3).
• Improving access to services within rural areas is identified as of
importance within RSS with a requirement that LTPs should identify where
improved public transport services are necessary to achieve this (Policy
RR4).
• Support the further development and success of key Regional tourism and
cultural assets including Worcester city centre, Malvern Hills, Severn
Valley Steam Railway and the West Midlands Safari Park (Policy PA10).
18

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
3.2.3 Regional Transport Strategy
RSS also contains the Regional Transport Strategy (RTS), and this highlights the
need to improve transport and access across the region in a way that supports
the RSS and helps deliver the West Midlands Region’s five transport priorities:
• Promote a change of hearts and minds of the Region’s population
• Make best use of the existing regional transport networks
• Provide a comprehensive public transport system that serves the urban areas
• Improve access to Birmingham International Airport and National Exhibition
Centre
• Ensure that the West Midlands is a reliable hub to serve regional, national
and international connections
RTS core policies to achieve these objectives are:
• Reducing the need to travel (Policy T2)
• Providing greater opportunities for walking and cycling (Policy T3)
• Promoting travel awareness (Policy T4)
• Development of an integrated public transport network where all people have
access to high quality and affordable public transport services across the
Region. (Policy T5)
• Development of a network of Strategic Park and Ride sites to reduce
congestion in major centres, including the Worcestershire Parkway station.
(Policy T6)
• Management of car parking to reduce congestion and encourage more
sustainable forms of travel (Policy T7).
• Demand Management – to manage peak demand on congested parts of the
highway network, re-allocate highway space, and consider charging schemes
in more congested centres (Policy T8).
• Local and Regional transport authorities should work together to provide and
maintain a strategic transport system (Policy T9).
• Ensure the reliable movement of goods and services (Policy T10).
• Support the further development of Birmingham International Airport as the
main regional airport, and improve surface access by public transport (Policy
T11).
The Region’s Transport Delivery Plan, published in March 2005, provides
information on the status and progress with implementation of each element of
Policy T12 within RTS. This policy sets out priorities for investment and includes
the Worcestershire Parkway railway station proposal that is contained within
LTP2.
3.2.4 Regional Housing Strategy
RSS identifies future housing provision for Worcestershire to be 1,200 units per
year for 2007-11, and 1,000 per year for 2011-21. This is a significant reduction
in the current allocation of 1,900 units per year. The target for housing
development on previously developed land is 67% for the LTP2 period (up to
19

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
2011), and therefore on average around 800 residential units can be expected
within predominantly urban areas, and 400 at greenfield sites.
Following the adoption of RSS, the Regional Housing Strategy has been
published (in June 2005), and the main policy links between RHS and LTP2 are
discussed in a later section of this chapter.
3.2.5 RSS Review
Although the RSS was adopted as recently as June 2004, there were a number
of areas of the strategy where the Office for the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM)
requested the Region to carry out further work. Those areas that are specifically
relevant to LTP2 are:
• Development of Regional Parking Standards
• Review of the potential for Demand Management
• Development of detailed proposals for the Strategic Park and Ride strategy
• Review of Airports policies following publication of a Government White Paper
on air travel
• Appraisal of the proposed Worcester sub-regional role
Worcestershire is taking an active role in these reviews. Of particular importance
to the LTP2 strategy are the Strategic Park and Ride review, which includes
Worcestershire Parkway and the potential identification of other Park and Ride
sites that could be located within the County whilst having the prime function of
promoting access to the West Midlands conurbation by passenger transport, and
the Worcester sub-regional role.
The County Council, as the strategic planning authority for the Worcestershire
sub-region, is taking the lead on the review of Worcester’s proposed role as a
sub-regional centre, with support from the three District Councils with a key
interest in the review (Worcester City Council, Malvern Hills District Council, and
Wychavon District Council).
Work is underway on the review, with initial conclusions expected by May 2006,
and with further work to be carried out during the remainder of 2006. The
conclusions of this review will be critical to the long-term transport strategy for
Worcestershire, and from the analysis already carried out for LTP2 it is clear that
transport constraints will be a major influence on the way in which Worcester can
fulfil the sub-regional role.
The importance of the Worcester Transport Study proposed in Policy WOR6 of
LTP2 is critical to this process, hence the objective of completing this study
during 2006 to contribute to the RSS Review.
20

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
3.3 WORCESTERSHIRE PARTNERSHIP
Overview
The Worcestershire Partnership is the countywide Local Strategic Partnership,
with a membership embracing all local authorities, health and learning providers,
police and probation services, other public agencies, voluntary, community and
environmental organisations, and local businesses. The vision of the
Partnership, as outlined in the Community Strategy for Worcestershire (2003-
13) and developed through consultation exercises with local residents, is:
A County with safe, cohesive, healthy and inclusive communities, a strong
and diverse economy and a valued and cherished environment.
This vision has been incorporated into the Worcestershire Local Area
Agreement (LAA), which is currently being negotiated between the County
Council, other strategic partners including the District Councils, and the
Government Office for the West Midlands. Whilst the LAA will not be concluded
until April 2006, it is clear that LTP2 will be an important supporting strategy,
particularly with regard to improving accessibility and tackling congestion which
have both been identified within the LAA as priorities for action.
Specific targets within the LAA have been set for increasing bus passenger
numbers within Worcestershire, and for reducing traffic congestion within
Stourport-on-Severn. These targets have been set for areas that can be
influenced during the LAA period (2006-2009) whilst being consistent with LTP2
objectives and priorities. Chapter 6 contains the full information on these targets,
how they have been set, how they will be monitored and what interim targets
have been set.
The Community Strategy vision is underpinned by the following values, which will
be incorporated within LTP2:
• Provide for the needs of all groups in society.
• Treat people with equality and value diversity.
• Build strong, cohesive communities and promote good community relations.
• Remove barriers that prevent individuals from reaching their full potential.
• Intervene early to prevent problems from becoming entrenched.
• Take account of the needs of future generations.
• Actively seek ways to improve people’s health and well-being.
• Work in partnership with others.
• Provide high quality and value for money services.
• Involve and listen to local people and local communities (these could be
geographical communities or communities of interest).
• Promote Worcestershire on the regional, national, European and international
stage and maximise the opportunities available to the County.
The specific themes through which the vision for the County will be achieved, and
how LTP2 can contribute to delivering these, are examined below.
21

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
Communities that are healthy, and support vulnerable people
Access to support and health care is a high priority for Worcestershire’s
residents, for older people and younger members of the population alike.
Transport provision will be critical to allowing all residents easy access to
healthcare, and this will be a prime consideration for the accessibility strategy
within LTP2. Co-ordination of public and community transport to access health,
education, social, employment and leisure facilities will be improved, and the
work of the proposed Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership will be critical to
achieving this, building on the successful work of its predecessor, the Joint
Worcestershire Transport and Health Partnership.
Communities that are safe, and feel safe.
Worcestershire is a comparatively safe place to live, but reducing crime and the
fear of crime remains a high local priority. Through the Asset Management Plan,
investment in maintenance and improvements to the highway and footpath
network will support initiatives to target specific areas where anti-social behaviour
is an identified problem, working with the Local Strategic Partnerships and
Community Safety Partnerships.
In urban areas, dangerous driving and road safety are of major concern. The
Road Safety Strategy within LTP2 will seek to build upon the significant progress
made in recent years by further reducing road accident casualties and by tackling
speeding within urban areas, as well as seeking to reduce the number of
casualties on the rural road network where specific problems with younger drivers
have been identified.
Learning and skills for everyone, at every age
Learning and education is an important issue for everyone within the County, and
the Accessibility Strategy within LTP2 will seek to ensure that access to
education facilities is available for all sectors of the community. A crucial link in
this respect will be the proposed expansion of the University College Worcester
and the development of a joint library facility within central Worcester, which
offers opportunities for linkage with the Sustainable Travel Town project to ensure
that a centre of learning that is accessible to all can be developed.
Economic success that is shared by all
Whilst Worcestershire is a prosperous County, there are pockets of deprivation,
under-employment in rural areas, issues relating to low pay / low skill jobs, and
an over-reliance upon certain employment sectors. The Community Strategy
states that the partners will ensure, through land use and transportation planning,
that sites and premises need by new investors and companies seeking to expand
are available within the County.
LTP2 will support initiatives such as the Central Technology Belt, market town
enhancement, and tourism activity within the County.
22

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
A better environment for today and for our children
Worcestershire’s environment is valued by its residents, and there is a strong
desire to protect the environment, especially the Green Belt, from development,
and to protect public access to the countryside. There is also a desire to see the
problem of flooding within the County addressed. The diversity in character
across the County is particularly valued. The direction of new development to
brownfield sites that are accessible by sustainable transport is a key objective, as
is the improvement of air quality. LTP2 will support these objectives, and will link
with the Worcestershire Climate Change Strategy that has been developed.
Connecting Worcestershire
Access to services is a key issue for local residents, with people living in rural
parts of the County particularly concerned about this. Inadequate transport has
been cited as a potential barrier to getting to the services and facilities needed for
every day life.
Specific objectives relating to transport are:
• Provide a transport system that is safe, efficient, clean and fair, and improve
bus services along key routes.
• Make use of any sources of funding to develop solutions to transport
problems and recognise the role of “community transport”.
LTP2 will form the main mechanism to secure the improved and integrated
transport system that will serve the needs of people who live and work within the
County. Of particular importance to meet the specific objectives outlined above
will be the Accessibility Strategy and the Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy.
Monitoring
Monitoring progress with the implementation of the Community Strategy is
undertaken by Theme Groups, with transport issues being covered by the
Economy and Transport Theme Group. This recognises the strong links between
the transport and economic development objectives contained within the strategy.
At District Level, there are eight Local Strategic Partnerships covering the County
and without exception these have identified transport as a key issue for their
communities. These partnerships are:
• Bromsgrove Partnership
• Vision 21 Malvern Hills LSP
• Redditch Partnership
• Worcester Alliance
• Wyre Forest Matters
• Wychavon LSP – embracing Partnerships covering the Droitwich, Evesham
and Pershore areas.
The Worcestershire Partnership structure, and relationships between the various
elements, is summarised in the following diagram:
23

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
Worcestershire
Assembly
Worcestershire
Partnership
Board
Support Team:
Partnership Co-ordinator
Communications and
Policy Officer
Funding and Resources
Manager (vacant)
Monitoring and
Implementation Manager
(vacant)
Support Officer
All theme groups look at
countywide, strategic issues and
geographic issues (specifically
District LSP activity)
Management Group
Task Groups:
Community Strategy
Steering Group
Funding and Resources
Group
Engaging Worcestershire
Steering Group
Children &
Young
People’s
Strategic
Partnership
Health
and
Social
Care
Board
Worcestershire
Partnership for
the Environment
Safer and
Stronger
Communities
Board
Economy
and
Transport
Theme
Group
Culture Theme
Group,
Learning Partnership
and
Other Relevant
Partnerships /
Working Groups
Meeting
the needs
of children
and young
people
Improving
health and
well-being
A better
environment
for today
and
tomorrow
Communities
that are safe
and feel safe
Economic
success
that is
shared by
all
Stronger
Communities
(LAA)
Opportunities
for all (CS)
LAA blocks aligned with
Community Strategy themes
Diverse range
of partnerships
to deliver
outcomes
24

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.4 WORCESTERSHIRE ECONOMIC STRATEGY 2004-14
Background
The overall vision of the Worcestershire Economic Strategy is simply expressed
as:
Economic success that is shared by all
Within Worcestershire, the unemployment rate is 2.2% (Source: County
Economic Summary; January 2006), which compares favourably with the
unemployment rates for the West Midlands region (4.0%) and England & Wales
(3.1%). During 2005, there was an increase in this rate due to the closure of the
Longbridge car plant (MG Rover), which employed 1,325 Worcestershire
residents (25% of the total workforce made redundant). Whilst by June 2005
around 24% of the workforce had found alternative work, it is clear that the future
re-development of the Longbridge Works as an employment site will be important
for Worcestershire, and is likely to generate significant travel demand both within
and through the County.
When considering the main urban areas, Redditch has the highest
unemployment rate at 3.3%, and Malvern the lowest (1.6%). This replicates the
District-wide figures, where Redditch Borough has the highest unemployment
rate (3.2%) and Malvern Hills the lowest (1.3%). Despite these relatively low
unemployment rates, there are pockets of deprivation across the County, largely
concentrated within Kidderminster, Redditch and Worcester, which highlights the
need to attract new employment opportunities to sites that are easily accessed
from these areas.
The overall health of the Worcestershire
economy can be identified through the Gross
Added Value (GVA) indicator, which provides
a measure for total economic activity within a
region. Over the period 1995-2003, the GVA
per head of resident population in
Worcestershire has declined from 85% of the
national average to 81%. A high level of outcommuting
from the County, along with a
relatively high number of elderly, non-working
people, contributes to this relatively low figure.
When specific industrial sectors are
considered, the 1995-2003 period has seen a
decline in the agriculture / hunting / forestry
area, and a major increase in the service
sector, which accounts for 72% of total GVA
for Worcestershire.
25

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Worcestershire Economic Strategy
Whilst these figures indicate a robust local economy, the Worcestershire
Partnership recognises a need to develop the economy further. The Partnership
has published The Economic Strategy for Worcestershire for 2004-14, which
aims to:
• Deliver the Community Strategy goal of “economic success that is shared by
all”.
• Deliver the Regional Economic Strategy (as contained within the RSS) in
Worcestershire.
• Link our local economic strategies to this common purpose.
The ten-year vision outlined within the strategy is:
In ten years time, Worcestershire will be an economic driver for the region –
with a prosperous and sustainable economy, driven by technology-led
enterprises, offering well paid skilled jobs and a high quality of life for its
residents.
Achieving this vision will be dependent upon a number of factors, one of which
will be developing the transport infrastructure of the County. The four main
objectives within the Strategy, which have been incorporated within the Local
Area Agreement, are:
• Priority One – developing a knowledge driven economy
• Priority Two – developing the infrastructure
• Priority Three – improving the skills base
• Priority Four – ensuring access to the benefits
The role of the LTP2 strategy towards helping achieve these objectives will be
physical, in terms of infrastructure improvements to open up economic
development sites and removing transport constraints, and through improvement
of accessibility to training and to employment opportunities.
A number of key economic regeneration initiatives are identified within the
strategy that will generate significant travel demands and require significant
investment in transport. These include:
• Central Technology Belt.
• Stourport Road Employment Corridor within Wyre Forest (includes British
Sugar site).
• Worcester City Centre (new University campus and library).
• Support for the rural economy.
In addition there are other major development proposals that may progress
during the LTP2 period that will have major transport needs, such as the Abbey
Stadium re-development in Redditch. Local economic regeneration proposals,
26

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
such as the Kidderminster Central Area Action Plan, will also have an influence
on LTP2 development.
3.5 TRAVEL TO WORK PATTERNS
Existing Travel to Work patterns (based on 2001 Census data) are shown in the
map below.
The key movement corridors are, in order of magnitude: -
• Bromsgrove ↔ Birmingham
• Malvern Hills ↔ Worcester
• Wychavon ↔ Worcester
• Redditch ↔ Birmingham
• Redditch ↔ Warwickshire
• Bromsgrove ↔ Redditch
• From Wyre Forest to Black Country, Birmingham and Wychavon (equal
movements)
• Bromsgrove → M42 corridor
The implications of these movements are considered below.
Bromsgrove - Birmingham
The Bromsgrove ↔ Birmingham travel to work movement is by far the largest in
the County accounting for some 15,000 two-way journeys in total, with nearly a
27

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
third of these journeys being made from Birmingham into Bromsgrove. This
corridor also contains the largest number of rail commuters (870 per day in 2001
– but this station has seen significant growth since), but this only accounts for 8%
of all work journeys on this corridor.
Given congestion problems on the A38 route between these centres, and
associated air quality problems at Lickey, the promotion of rail for work journeys
on this corridor will form an important element of the LTP2 strategy. Travel
demand on this corridor is likely to increase during the LTP2 period through
development of the Bromsgrove Technology Park and Central Technology Belt
developments within Birmingham (e.g. Pebble Mill, Longbridge). This will offset
the impact of the MG Rover closure, which has seen around 700 Bromsgrove
residents lose their job at Longbridge.
Malvern - Worcester
The second most significant movement is between Malvern and Worcester with
over 9,000 journeys in each direction. This corridor has seen a recent (June
2005) improvement to bus services providing direct links to employment sites in
eastern Worcester from Malvern. There is a parallel rail route, but poor rail
service reliability and lack of car parking at the Malvern stations act as constraints
for commuting by rail between these centres.
Traffic congestion on the A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road is exacerbated
by significant journey to work movements between Malvern and the employment
sites (including County Hall and Worcester Royal Infirmary) on the eastern side of
Worcester. Again, this corridor is likely to see increased demand with the future
development of employment sites within Worcester, including the University
College expansion, and the further development of Malvern Science and
Technology Park programmed for the LTP2 period.
Wychavon – Worcester
This movement is dispersed over a wide number of routes into Worcester, as
Wychavon District effectively covers the surrounding areas to the north, east and
south-east of the city. These areas contain a large number of villages as well as
the towns of Droitwich, Evesham and Pershore, from which the commuters into
Worcester travel. The dispersed nature of this demand means that it is difficult to
provide an attractive alternative to the car simply by investing in improvements to
a single passenger transport route.
Redditch – Birmingham / Warwickshire
Redditch’s location and its recent history as a New Town designed to take
overspill population from Birmingham mean that it inevitably has a strong focus
on travel into the city. The town forms the southern terminus of the Cross-City
railway line that provides services to a number of employment sites in
Birmingham means that it is not surprising that the town has a strong Travel To
Work corridor focussed on the city.
Travel demand on this corridor will potentially grow with the re-development of
the Longbridge Works, and the development of Central Technology Belt sites in
Birmingham. The identified sites such as the University or Pebble Mill are
28

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
generally well located for access from the stations served by the Cross-City rail
service, and therefore additional pressure could result on these. The direct road
route between Redditch and Birmingham is the A441, which is single carriageway
through the village of Bordesley to the north of Redditch. Again, additional Travel
to Work journeys on this route will add to existing congestion problems,
especially when added to development traffic from more local land use proposals.
Redditch is also on the boundary with Warwickshire, and easy access to the M42
and the A46 mean that employment opportunities within towns such as Stratfordupon-Avon
and Warwick are relatively convenient to reach from the town, in
addition to more local opportunities in villages such as Studley.
Bromsgrove – Redditch
The proximity of these towns, and the good road links between the two, has
resulted in strong travel to work flows in both directions, with around 5,500
journeys a day being made between the two towns. This reflects the high levels
of employment opportunities in each town, and the short travel time to move
between them.
Wyre Forest – Black Country / Birmingham / Wychavon
There is a relatively even spread between the numbers commuting from the Wyre
Forest into the Black Country and Birmingham, reflecting the proximity of the
District to the conurbation. The demand for travel on these corridors does place
pressure upon local communities such as Hagley where the A456(T) can be
congested at peak periods, as well as on the parallel rail route which can also
experience capacity problems.
The inclusion of Wychavon as a strong Travel to Work corridor for Wyre Forest
residents is due to the location of employment sites that serve Stourport and
Kidderminster primarily, but are within Wychavon District. These sites include the
Hartlebury Trading Estate, as well as other industrial estates between
Kidderminster and Droitwich.
Bromsgrove – M42 Corridor
The easy access from Bromsgrove to the M42 motorway means that the
employment sites around the M42 to the South and East of Birmingham, such as
Blythe Valley Business Park or the National Exhibition Centre, are easily reached
from the town. With recent expansion in housing within Bromsgrove through
developments such as The Oakells the town has become an attractive base for
commuters using this corridor as well as those travelling into Birmingham itself.
This travel demand does, however, add to the pressure on M42 Junction 1
referred to earlier.
Other Issues
As well as identifying the specific Travel to Work Corridors described above, the
Census data does highlight a number of other issues.
Worcester is the only net importer of commuters within the County, with more
people travelling into the city to work than are leaving it to work elsewhere. This
29

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
reflects its status as the county town. However, other then the strong influx of
commuters from Malvern referred to above, there is no other dominant movement
into the city from outlying areas.
Analysis of the mode of travel to work shows Worcester has the highest
proportion walking (21%) and cycling (6%) to work, reflecting that residents are
able to find work more locally than in other areas of the County. Redditch has the
highest proportion of commuters by bus (10.4%).
Rail carries around 20% of commuters from Worcester, Wyre Forest and Malvern
travelling into Birmingham, and the importance of this mode reflects the
opportunities that rail enhancements could bring in achieving further modal shift.
Interaction between towns in the north of the county is far more pronounced, with
significant flows between Kidderminster, Bromsgrove and Redditch as well as to
the Black Country and Birmingham. However, passenger transport networks in
the north of the County are very focussed upon providing access to Birmingham,
and do not provide good accessibility form people wishing to travel west – east
(or vice versa) across the southern edge of the conurbation. The M42 and
connecting routes such as the A491 do provide, however, reasonable road routes
for this west – east corridor.
1991-2001 Trend
Comparison between these commuting patterns and those identified in 1991, as
shown in the Table below, indicates that there is now less of a focus on
commuting into Birmingham, and higher levels of commuting to other
neighbouring authorities such as Warwickshire and Gloucestershire. In increase
in people living and working locally is also evident, which is perhaps an indication
of the greater level of home-working (see below).
Change in commuter trips between 1991 and 2001 (Commuters in 2001 - Commuters in 1991)
Live In
Travel to work in: Worcestershire Broms Malvern Redd Worc City Wych Wyre For
Birmingham -3195 -3977 97 -869 763 315 476
Coventry 413 122 -46 159 69 139 -30
Dudley 1498 274 92 94 249 197 592
Sandwell 526 -4 37 89 228 78 98
Solihull 1516 506 92 372 171 275 100
Walsall 310 102 18 -1 23 105 63
Wolverhampton 32 54 -9 -49 -19 23 32
Warwickshire 2666 331 123 1016 246 821 129
Gloucestershire 2209 113 -228 20 663 1529 112
Bromsgrove 8605 6748 144 866 305 361 181
Malvern 4077 76 1980 60 1054 493 414
Redditch 3771 -140 -3 3427 143 82 262
Worcester City 9344 428 -395 173 7322 839 977
Wychavon 12892 455 142 368 692 10088 1147
Wyre Forest 6150 39 213 67 228 158 5445
Total 50814 5127 2257 5792 12137 15503 9998
30

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Home-Based Working in Worcestershire
The Labour Force Survey shows Worcestershire to have a relatively high
proportion of people who work mainly from home as the graph below shows:-
16
14
% of all in employment
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Worcestershire
West Midlands
UK
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
The development of communication technologies has increased the opportunities
for people to work from home thus reducing the pressures on the transport
network at peak times. The encouragement through Travel Plans, such as that
being implemented by the County Council, of the introduction of flexible working
arrangements, including home-working, can only improve this trend even further.
Rural Economy
The County has a considerable agricultural industry, notably within the Vale of
Evesham where the intensive agriculture and packing industry generates
significant freight movements. Overall 70% of the County’s land is farmed with
the agricultural sector providing 3% of employment (compared with 1%
nationally).
However, the low wages on offer within the agricultural sector result in a number
of accessibility problems that can significantly affect people’s ability to reach
employment opportunities. Car ownership can become a problem, restricting
people’s ability to access employment opportunities within rural areas where
passenger transport services are already limited and coming under increasing
pressure due to reducing commercial services and increasing pressure on
Council budgets.
Low wages also restrict people’s ability to purchase or rent homes in rural areas,
where house prices in Worcestershire are significantly greater, resulting in
agricultural workers living within towns where property is cheaper, as discussed
below.
Another dimension of this sector of the economy is the increasing reliance on
foreign workers, generally during the peak growing season. This reflects the low
wages, seasonal nature of the work and the low unemployment rate within
31

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Worcestershire, making it difficult for farmers to fill these jobs from the local
working population.
These workers are often without private means of transport, with some living onsite
and others being transported to the workplace from the surrounding towns
and cities, including Birmingham. The tragic accident near Evesham in 2003
where a minibus carrying such workers was hit by a train on a private level
crossing highlights a road safety problem where drivers do not have English as a
first language, and therefore do not have the ability to read road signs. This is an
area of road safety education that will be given greater prominence within the
County’s Road Safety strategy.
3.6 HOUSING
Overview
The publication of the Regional Housing Strategy (RHS) in June 2005 seeks to
identify how the RSS objectives will be met with regard to future housing needs
across the West Midlands Region. Amongst the core aims of the RHS are:
• To create mixed, balanced and inclusive communities
• To influence the future development of new housing provision to facilitate and
enhance the economic development of the region
• To address the variety of needs across a range of specific sectors of housing
circumstances
• To achieve social and other affordable housing
• To achieve sustainable access to minimise environmental resource
consumption and traffic and improve the quality of the environment
Achieving these aims within Worcestershire will be the responsibility of a wide
range of partners through a variety of policy tools, one of which is LTP2. Whilst
the most direct influence that transport policy will have will be through the
promotion of new housing development at sustainable, accessible locations,
success in the other objectives listed above will have an impact upon travel
patterns, not least for work journeys, by influencing people’s decisions on where
they live.
3.6.1.1 Sustainable and Accessible Development
The promotion of sustainable developments will largely be through ensuring that
transport and land use strategies within the County integrate with each other, and
a crucial factor in Worcestershire, given the coverage of six Local Planning
Authorities, will be the use of accessibility planning to help identify the most easily
accessible sites for housing at the earliest possible stage of the land use planning
process.
LTP2 will therefore set out clearly the transport strategy for Worcestershire,
highlighting known major housing developments that will be capable of
contributing to the delivery of the strategy. It will also set out expectations for the
use of accessibility planning techniques when considering where new housing
32

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
should be allocated when District Councils start the process of producing their
Local Development Frameworks.
Future decisions on the overall housing allocation for Worcestershire will be a
major influence on travel patterns, and a crucial aspect of the Worcester subregional
role will be the level of housing growth that the city will be expected to
accommodate over the 2011-21 period. The proposed transportation study for
Worcester will be critical to aid identification of the current transport constraints
and how these could be overcome to permit Worcester to meet the housing
needs of the future.
Another important area of work is the review of the Transportation Design Guide
for New Development, which will be completed during 2006. This document will
outline how the County Council will, as Local Highway Authority, expect the
transportation impact of new development, including housing, to be considered,
as well as providing general guidance on details such as highway and footway
networks etc.. The Councils policies regarding developer funding to support the
implementation of the LTP2 strategy to meet the mutual needs of the Local
Highway Authority, the housebuilder, and the residents of new houses, will also
be set out in the Design Guide.
Within the new Design Guide, a greater emphasis will be placed upon the use of
accessibility planning when considering new housing development, and
developers of larger sites (100 units or more) will be expected to submit an
Accessibility Assessment as part of a wider Transportation Assessment. The
objective is to ensure that all new major housing development is brought forward
with good access to facilities as a core principle, to meet with the aims of the
RHS outlined above.
3.6.1.2 Affordability
The availability of affordable housing is a major issue within Worcestershire. The
rural districts of Malvern Hills and Wychavon have significantly higher average
house prices than other districts in the County, as indicated below.
District
Average House Price
for Jul - Sept 2003
Malvern Hills £186,739
Wychavon £185,547
Bromsgrove £171,436
Worcester City £137,839
Wyre Forest £129,348
Redditch £127,615
This is a significant contributory factor to the increase in commuting distance that
has been observed between 1991 and 2001 as people need to travel further to
reach their place of work as they often cannot afford to buy new housing close to
their place of employment, or they choose not to re-locate due to the high costs
involved in moving house.
Within Worcestershire, this is a particularly significant issue in rural areas, and
can lead to lower paid agricultural workers, for example, commuting out from
towns to their workplace, as the cheaper housing lies within the urban areas of
33

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Worcester, Wyre Forest and Redditch. This trend also affects village life, with
increased pressure on the viability of local facilities such as shops, schools and
healthcare facilities, as young families are priced out of rural communities.
Research undertaken for the RHS has emphasised this issue of affordability of
housing in the Worcestershire area. The Southern area of the West Midlands
(which includes Worcestershire) has a price to income ratio for housing of 9:1,
which is the highest ratio for any part of the West Midlands and means that
almost three-quarters of new households are unable to purchase new housing at
the standard price: income ratio of 3.5:1. (Source: Table 3.10, Regional Housing
Strategy: June 2005)
3.6.1.3 Future Housing Needs
The RHS identifies the following policies for future housing needs within
Worcestershire:
• Worcester should be the focal point for social housing investment in the
short-term (Policy 3.23)
• In Redditch, there is a need to improve the stock and mix of housing on offer
I its older areas of predominantly social housing (Policy 3.24)
• It is important that Bromsgrove achieves a balanced continuity with the
conurbation housing markets by sustaining that range of housing choices
throughout its own housing market.
• The Regional Housing Board expects to see the principle of sustainable
communities incorporated into all Local Development Frameworks across the
Region (Policy 7.1). This includes the promotion of housing that
minimises greenhouse gas emissions, car travel and car dependence
(Policy 7.2) and to promote development and improvements to the housing
stock that support healthy lifestyles (including reducing the need to travel and
encouragement of sustainable forms of transport) (Policy 7.6).
• Housing should promote positive health, in particular by enabling and
encouraging people to walk and cycle as part of their daily routine (Policy
7.20)
LTP2 will therefore seek to support these objectives, and the Worcester transport
Study in particular will be critical to ensuring that Worcester can in future fulfil its
role as a focal point for new housing by identifying the appropriate transport
strategy and investment necessary to remove transport constraints.
These policies also fit neatly with the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town project,
which incorporates a programme of Personalised Travel Planning for residents
aimed at highlighting alternative travel choices that are available. The project
also includes a joint study with the South Worcestershire Primary Care Trust and
the University of Worcester aimed at studying the health impact of encouraging
people to walk, cycle and take passenger transport for more journeys. The
results of this research will be of use in further reviewing the aims listed above,
and helping to identify how they can be best achieved.
34

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.7 TOURISM
3.7.1.1 Regional Visitor Economy Strategy
Advantage West Midlands (AWM) published the Regional Visitor Economy
Strategy in Spring 2004, setting out the vision for the future of tourism within the
region. The strategy identifies the potential for sub-regional partnerships to be
established to promote tourism, and Worcestershire forms one of these subregions.
The potential for closer working between local authorities and tourism
businesses within Worcestershire is being explored, with the aim of making
tourism (which is Worcestershire’s third largest industry worth £422 million each
year) even stronger.
3.7.1.2 Major Visitor Attractions
Worcester
Worcester is one of only eight ‘key destinations’ identified in the Regional Visitor
Economy Strategy and is considered to have growth potential for tourism. The
city has the benefits of a major riverside setting, with the River Severn running
through the city centre itself, and the view of Worcester Cathedral from the
County Cricket Ground is one of the iconic images of British sport. Close to the
Cathedral is the Royal Worcester Porcelain factory, which although facing closure
will retain its museum on site. Other historic buildings within Worcester, notably
The Commandery and Greyfriars, are also near to the Cathedral.
The existing road network within Worcester, with its dependence upon the city
centre bridge over the River Severn and its feeder roads, means that those
critical areas of the city that are of greatest interest to the visitor, are also busy
traffic routes. The A44, for example, which separates the Cathedral from the
pedestrianised High Street, has an average daily traffic flow of around 20,000
vehicles a day.
There are also plans, led by Worcester City Council, to develop a riverside park
along both banks of the River Severn through Worcester city centre, linking the
Canal Basins at Diglis to the south of the centre with the racecourse to the north.
The ability to easily link this park with the city centre itself is again potentially
constrained by the presence of the feeder routes to the city centre bridge.
Therefore, for Worcester to fulfil its role as a key visitor destination within the
West Midlands, and achieve tourism growth, the level of traffic carried over the
existing city centre bridge would ideally be significantly reduced, and this will
need to be a consideration within the LTP2 strategy.
Wyre Forest Attractions
The West Midlands Safari Park and the Severn Valley Railway (SVR), along with
the Wyre Forest Visitor Centre, form a cluster of tourist attractions in the Northwest
of the County. The Safari Park is located between Kidderminster and
Bewdley, whilst the SVR has stations in both towns, and the Wyre Forest itself
stretches for several miles to the North and West of Bewdley, with the Visitor
Centre being just to the West of the town.
35

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
On busy days, traffic generated by these attractions can cause traffic congestion
within the neighbouring towns. With the proximity of these attractions, and the
location of the SVR terminus next to the main railway station at Kidderminster,
opportunities to promote sustainable travel to reach these tourist sites and
initiatives such as joint ticketing between the attractions should be feasible.
These could build on investment already made in the National Cycle Network
Route 45, which provides local connections into the Wyre Forest for local and
long distance cyclists.
The Canal network also provides a local tourist attraction within the Georgian
town of Stourport-on-Severn, and plans to re-open a Canal Basin in the town will
further enhance its attraction as a visitor destination. The town already
experiences significant traffic congestion in the peak visitor season due to its
popularity with day-trippers from the Black Country.
Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
There are two Areas of Natural Outstanding Beauty within Worcestershire, these
being the Malvern Hills and the Cotswolds.
The Malvern Hills AONB covers not only the Hills themselves, but a significant
amount of surrounding countryside, and it straddles the Worcestershire –
Herefordshire border. There is a substantial population within the various
settlements that make up Malvern that is able to access the Hills directly on foot,
by bike, or on horseback. However, the Hills also attract people from across the
County and beyond, and this creates travel demand and pressures upon the local
road network and car parking facilities. The topography of the area, with steep
gradients, mean that junctions are not able to easily cater for large traffic flows,
adding to the difficulties.
The Three Counties Showground, located to the South of Malvern, is a major
venue for agricultural shows and for an increasingly wide range of other events.
Larger events will generate major traffic flows seeking to reach the site from the
M5 motorway using a local road network that is designed for much smaller
volumes. In particular, access from the North relies the A4440 Worcester
Southern Link Road, which is a congestion hotspot within the County, whilst
access from the South is via a series of “B” Class roads. Aspirations to make
further use of the Showground as a visitor attraction will therefore be a major
concern in transportation terms.
The Cotswold AONB extends over a broad area of the South Midlands, and only
a small section lies within Worcestershire. This includes the village of Broadway,
which is a honeypot visitor attraction and can come under severe pressure at
peak periods. The Gloucestershire and Warwickshire Railway, which currently
operates between Toddington and Cheltenham within Gloucestershire, are
presently working on an extension of the railway northwards to Broadway.
The Cotswold AONB Management Board has established a Transport Working
Group to ensure that a common approach is taken across the AONB on transport
issues.
36

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Inland Waterways
Most of the visitor attractions within Worcestershire are located in rural areas,
and therefore offer a challenge to reduce car-dependent tourism. However,
opportunities to promote sustainable tourism exist based on the steam railways
and particularly on the inland waterway network within the County. This
comprises the Rivers Severn and Avon, the Staffordshire & Worcestershire
Canal, and the Worcester & Birmingham Canal.
This network offers an interconnecting system giving routes from Worcestershire
to the North, East and South, with Basins at Worcester and Stourport-on-Severn
providing the interchange between the Canals and the River Severn.
A £11 million funding package for the restoration of the Droitwich Canals has
recently been secured with a £3 million grant from AWM, to complement funding
from Wychavon District Council, the County Council, British Waterways, and the
National Lottery. Once restored, the Droitwich Canals will complete a 21 mile
canal loop linking the Worcester & Birmingham Canal in the East to the navigable
River Severn in the West. The restored loop will be unique in leisure transport
terms by providing a one-way cruising circuit that can be completed in a long
weekend. Restoration will also enable the completion of attractive cycle and
footpath routes and will generate enhanced land values and the urban
regeneration of canal-side sites in Droitwich that are currently derelict.
Other Visitor Attractions
There are a wide range of visitor attractions throughout the County, including
National Trust properties, English Heritage sites and privately operated
attractions. Many of these sites are in rural locations and are relatively
inaccessible by passenger transport, but planning of walking and cycling routes
could easily take these sites into account to ensure that access by these modes
in encouraged. In addition, Travel Plans could be developed by the operators of
the attraction, as has been the case with some National Trust properties, and
these would also be encouraged through the LTP2 strategy.
3.7.1.3 Olympic Games - 2012
The successful bid to hold the Olympic Games in London in 2012 will create a
major opportunity for all regions of the country to market
themselves as a tourist destination. There are two main
areas of opportunity, these being:
• To act as a base for a competing team, by providing training camp facilities.
• To get people visiting Britain for the Olympics to stay in Worcestershire for a
time as part of their visit.
Both of these options are currently being considered by the County Council in
partnership with public sector organisations at a regional and local level. The
Sports Science facilities available at the University of Worcester could prove to
be attractive for competing teams, whilst Worcester Rugby Club is also planning
to improve its facilities.
37

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The role of the LTP2 strategy will be to ensure that the transportation
infrastructure within the County can accommodate opportunities to gain benefits
from the Olympic Games over the next five years through supporting the
appropriate development of required facilities.
3.8 EDUCATION
3.8.1.1 University of Worcester
The main higher education facility within the County is the University of
Worcester (UoW). UoW achieved full University status in 2005, thereby
achieving the main objective of its Strategic Plan for 2004 - 08. The Plan outlines
five key ambitions for UoW, these being to:
• Be an accessible university of choice.
• Provide excellent, inclusive higher education.
• Produce highly employable, innovative, professional alumni.
• Deliver first class scholarship, applied research and consultancy.
• Make an outstanding contribution to the development of the region.
To fulfil these objectives, UoW is progressing plans to significantly expand by
establishing a new campus within Worcester city centre on the former hospital
site which will allow an increase in the number of students to around 12,000 in
total from its current base of around 8,000.
A feasibility study undertaken for the University expansion has highlighted the
following major benefits:
• Increased participation in higher education, particularly in Herefordshire and
Worcestershire.
• The strong development of entrepreneurship and higher level skills.
• A major contribution to the regeneration of Worcester and to the economic
and social development of the region.
• Innovative infrastructure development that will widen participation in higher
education.
• Enhanced institutional financial efficiency and sustainability.
The proposed campus is ideally located for the promotion of sustainable transport
as it is within walking distance of both Worcester Bus Station and Foregate Street
railway station. There is also an opportunity to link the University expansion to
the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town project to maximise the promotion of
sustainable transport. Potential also exists for the inclusion of the University’s
Henwick Campus as an interchange point within the Project Express strategy for
the city, covering the north-western approach to the city as well as assisting with
passenger transport links between the two University sites.
38

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.8.1.2 Further Education
In addition to the University, there are a number of other further education
establishments across the County. Most of the main towns have a further
education facility of some description, with the main sites being as follows:
• Worcester College of Technology
• North East Worcestershire (NEW) College
• Pershore Group of Colleges
• Evesham College
• Malvern Hills College
• Worcester Sixth Form College
• Kidderminster College of Further Education
These facilities offer vocational courses and play a major role in getting suitable
training for people to give them an improved chance of obtaining employment.
3.8.1.3 Schools
Schools are major generators of demand for travel and reflecting this the
Department for Education and Science has set a requirement for all state schools
to adopt a Travel Plan by 2010.
Within Worcestershire, there are 270 schools with 80,000 pupils, of which 10,858
were entitled to the provision of transport to and from school and college.
Significant progress has been made during the first LTP period to promote the
development of School Travel Plans (STP) at Worcestershire schools. By
December 2005, 41 STPs had been adopted, whilst major investment in Safer
Routes to School projects ensured that 139 schools benefited from infrastructure
improvements. These ranged from new pedestrian crossing points to the
provision of cycle parking facilities, and will be fully reported within the LTP1
Delivery Report in July 2006.
Following on from the Redditch Schools Review, implemented during the first
LTP period, the County Council has undertaken further reviews of school
provision in the Bromsgrove and Wyre Forest areas. In Bromsgrove, a major PFI
building programme has secured approval and this will be implemented over the
LTP2 period. The development of School Travel Plans is integral to this project
to maximise opportunities to promote sustainable travel to schools.
The Wyre Forest Schools Review, which is due to be implemented in September
2007, will result in significant changes to school travel patterns within that area,
and LTP2 will seek to build on the opportunities for achieving more sustainable
travel that this will provide. This will involve working with the Children’s Services
Directorate of the County Council, and with Wyre Forest District Council to
ensure that resources are co-ordinated to support the implementation of School
Travel Plans at each of the schools affected by the Review.
39

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.9 RIVER CROSSINGS
The River Severn bisects the County in a North-South direction and, as shown on
the map below, there are only 9 bridges crossing the river within the County that
can be used by vehicular traffic. This is a major constraint on east-west travel
across the County, particularly within the Worcester area where 77,000 vehicles
a day cross the two bridges. These are individually busier than the M50 in the
south of the County, reflecting the importance of the Worcester bridges for
strategic movements to the west. Maintenance works or flooding can create
major problems where these result in bridge closures in the Worcester area.
The South of the County is particularly poorly served, with the Mythe Bridge
(A438) being weight restricted, and Upton Bridge being vulnerable to flooding.
As the M50 motorway is only accessible from the West of the River Severn by
crossing the Malvern Hills or using minor roads to reach Junction 2, any problems
at Upton requires traffic to use the congested Worcester bridges to cross the
Severn.
The limited capacity at river crossings in the south of the County act as a
potential constraint on future development at Malvern, and will be a factor in how
well the town can meet its identified role as a key node on the Central
Technology Belt.
In addition, there are limited crossings of the Rivers Avon and Teme, which bisect
the South-east and North-west of the County respectively.
The vulnerability of movement across the County to problems with any of these
major bridges has been highlighted in 2004 by the three week closure of Holt
Bridge, North of Worcester, for maintenance works, and by the major restrictions
at Upton Bridge when significant maintenance problems were identified requiring
a weight and width restriction whilst a diversion route was constructed. In each
case, the alternative diversion route exceeded 20 miles in length and placed
greater pressure on the bridges at Worcester.
With a total of 870 bridges and structures across the County, the Transport Asset
Management Plan will need to ensure that a strategy is put in place to anticipate
and tackle emerging problems with structures.
40

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
41

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.10 HEALTH
Overview
The way in which health services are provided within Worcestershire are
currently under review, and the current arrangements are therefore likely to
change over the LTP2 period. These arrangements are outlined below.
3.10.1.1 Acute Care Facilities
There are three acute care hospitals within Worcestershire, at Kidderminster,
Redditch and Worcester itself, and since 1999 the National Health Service and
County Council have placed great emphasis upon improving public transport
access to these sites through investment in bus services. The successful Joint
Worcestershire Transport and Health Partnership has been the catalyst for this
work, and has been a model for similar partnerships elsewhere in the country.
3.10.1.2 Primary Care Trusts
Frontline and preventative healthcare activity is led by the three Primary Care
Trusts (PCT) currently operating in Worcestershire. These are:
• Redditch and Bromsgrove PCT
• South Worcestershire PCT (covering Malvern Hills, Worcester and Wychavon
Districts)
• Wyre Forest PCT
The PCTs are responsible for the operation of Community Hospitals at
Bromsgrove, Evesham, Malvern, Pershore and Tenbury Wells, as well as 80 GP
surgeries that provide the bulk of frontline health services to the community.
South Worcestershire PCT currently is progressing an ambitious capital
programme that includes the construction of a new Community Hospital in
Pershore (due to open in September 2006), with similar proposals for Evesham
and Malvern currently at the planning stage. The programme also includes
support for new GP surgeries including the potential for co-location of other
healthcare providers, such as dental surgeries, on the same site.
Wyre Forest PCT is also developing proposals for new GP surgeries within
Kidderminster.
3.10.1.3 Hereford and Worcester Ambulance Trust
The Ambulance Service is currently provided by one agency covering
Worcestershire and Herefordshire. The main issue relating to emergency
journeys made by the service is the need to ensure that traffic congestion does
not compromise the journey times that the service needs to achieve in
responding to emergency calls, and in this respect the role of the Council’s
Network Control Manager will be crucial.
42

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
For non-emergency transport, the key issue will be whether both the Ambulance
Service and the County Council can secure efficiencies by pooling resources for
journeys to and from healthcare sites, and the Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy will address this issue.
3.10.1.4 Transport Issues
Access to healthcare facilities is a major local issue that has been highlighted
through the development of the Community Strategy, and will be considered
within LTP2 through the accessibility mapping work.
However, the health aspects of transport cover far more than simply access to
health. LTP2 seeks to promote more journeys by public transport, walking and
cycling, and if this objective can be achieved the outcome should be an
improvement in the overall health of the population. These modes of travel give
people greater exercise than travelling by car, and can help tackle problems such
as obesity and heart disease that are a drain on national resources.
The Rights of Way Improvement Plan will also contribute towards the promotion
of improved health through the encouragement of walking, cycling and horseriding
as a leisure activity, whilst the Sustainable Travel Town project includes a
joint study with the University College Worcester and South Worcestershire
Primary Care Trust which will explore the health benefits of walking and cycling
more through monitoring the health of Worcester residents participating in the
project.
In addition, the improvement of air quality would help relieve pressure upon the
NHS through the reduction in the number of people suffering from respiratory
diseases such as asthma, whilst improvements in road safety and the continued
reduction in road casualties also mean that continuing pressure on NHS
resources will be reduced.
Therefore, the successful implementation of the LTP2 strategy will have major
benefits for the health service providers within Worcestershire.
3.10.1.5 Summary
Whilst the structure of the National Health Service delivery organisation in
Worcestershire is under review, the experience of the first LTP period is that an
extremely good working relationship with local healthcare providers has been
established. This has operated through the Joint Transport and Health
Partnership, and it is intended to bring this relationship forward in the LTP2
period under the new Accessibility Partnership. This will enable the links between
the transport and health sectors to be extended to other sectors, notably in the
employment field, building on the experience already gained over the past seven
years.
43

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.11 ENVIRONMENT
3.11.1 Air Quality
Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 places a statutory duty upon local authorities
to periodically review and assess the air quality within their area. This involves
consideration of present and likely future air quality against national air quality
standards and objectives. Where it appears that the air quality objectives will not
be met by the designated target dates (currently 2005), local authorities must
declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and develop an action plan to
address the problem.
Within Worcestershire, the District Councils have this statutory duty, but the
County Council is represented on the Hereford and Worcestershire Pollution
Group to ensure that transport policy and air quality issues are closely linked.
Three Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) have been declared within the
County, as shown on the map below.
Specifically, the declared AQMA’s are at:
44

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Welch Gate, Bewdley;
• A451 Horsefair, Kidderminster
• M42 Junction 1, north of Bromsgrove
The County has worked with the relevant District Councils and the Highways
Agency to identify strategies to improve air quality at these locations, involving
traffic modelling, local consultation and feasibility studies. These strategies will
be implemented as part of the LTP2 programme.
The map also shows the locations of sites that are showing borderline air quality
levels that will be sensitive to any significant traffic increases in the future. These
sensitive areas include: -
• Kidderminster Town Centre
• Stourport Town Centre
• Bromsgrove Town Centre
• Worcester City Centre
• Redditch – A441
In general, it is clear that air quality within the County is good, and there are few
traffic related air quality problems that need to be addressed through the LTP.
However, it is clear that those centres mentioned above could develop future
problems in the next round of air quality assessments undertaken by the Districts
should traffic levels continue to increase during the LTP2 period.
3.11.2 Worcestershire Climate Change Strategy
The Worcester Community Strategy contains a commitment to
“Develop a Climate Change Plan for the County that contributes towards
the national and international actions to tackle the causes and effects of
Climate Change”.
The aim is to provide an agreed strategic framework to:
• Raise awareness of the issue of Climate Change
• Reduce Climate Change causing gas emissions across the County by 10% by
2010 and 20% by 2020.
• Assist adaptation to the impacts of Climate Change on the County.
The transport sector is identified as one of four main sources of climate change
gas emissions, and the LTP2 therefore has a key role to play in ensuring the
success of this strategy.
Research carried out for the Worcestershire Partnership has indicated that 73%
of County residents believe that Climate Change is a problem about which
everyone can do something. The challenge will be to translate this belief into
positive action, and to bring about behavioural change such as a reduced
demand for travel by car.
45

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Worcestershire is particularly vulnerable to the impact of flooding, as has been
seen in the past five years, and a number of highway improvements have been
undertaken in LTP1 to reduce the impact of flooding on the transportation
network. These have included the raising of the A4103 at Bransford and the new
approach viaduct on the A4104 at Upton is higher than the old structure to reduce
the risk of flooding.
The chart below shows the source of carbon dioxide emissions for
Worcestershire. It is estimated that transport is responsible for 23% of carbon
dioxide emissions in the County, which is above average compared to the
national picture. This illustrates that achieving reduction in car use could
potentially make a significant impact on such emissions.
Transport
23%
Waste/other
2%
Domestic
26%
Domestic
Commercial/ Public service
Industrial consumption
Transport
Industrial
32%
Commercial/service
17%
Waste/other
The promotion of alternative fuels and dual-fuel vehicles will also be a key
objective to bring about a reduction in the impact that transport is having on the
environment.
3.11.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment
The European Union’s Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive
came into force in July 2004, and applies to statutory plans and programmes
such as the LTP. The SEA objective is to:
Provide a high level protection of the environment and to contribute to the
integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and
adoption of plans and programmes with a view to promoting sustainable
development.
LTP2 obviously comes under the category of statutory plan for which an SEA will
be required, and therefore a SEA has been carried out.
The programme followed for the development of the SEA is as follows:
• November 2004 – appointment of consultants.
• April 2005 – publication of SEA Scoping Report.
46

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• April – May 2005 – consultation with statutory consultation bodies and with a
range of other interested organisations. This included a workshop event.
• August 2005 – publication of draft SEA.
• October - December 2005 – public consultation, including a further
workshop with various organisations.
• March 2006 – publication of final SEA.
The consultation has involved the Countryside Agency, English Nature, English
Heritage, the Environment Agency, District Councils, GO-WM, Worcestershire
Wildlife Trust, Council for the Preservation of Rural England (CPRE), and the
Malvern Hills and Cotswold AONB Boards.
The SEA assessed the transport strategies contained within the Provisional LTP2
submission, identifying a number of issues that required detailed consideration
and has influenced the final LTP2 strategy by highlighting a number of projects
where specific references to the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment
was required, and through the inclusion of an additional section within the Air
Quality and Environment Strategy containing policies confirming that the County
Council will promote sustainable design principles, re-cycling of materials and
other environmental standards in the implementation of the LTP2 strategy.
3.12 WORCESTERSHIRE IN 2020
Overview
The strategic influences upon LTP2 have been outlined above, and it is clear that
there are likely to be many additional pressures upon the transport network
should these aspirations all be met during the LTP2 period and beyond. This
section seeks to identify the local influences on LTP2 at District level, and to
identify how each District is likely to develop up to 2020 based on existing plans
and trends.
It is clear that the transport needs within each part of the County will differ, and
the land use proposals contained in Local Plans / Local Development
Frameworks will create varying demands on the transport network. Local
transport priorities will vary as well, as has been clear from the consultation
process. It is also clear from the analysis undertaken that resolving transport
problems within Worcestershire is crucial to enable the plans for the future
development of the County, as envisaged by the Worcestershire Partnership and
the West Midlands Regional Assembly, to be achieved.
Bromsgrove
As highlighted earlier, the transport corridor between Bromsgrove and
Birmingham is the busiest in terms of work trips within the County. This remains
the case despite recent events at MG Rover. The development of the
Bromsgrove Technology Park, which is under construction, will increase travel
demand within Bromsgrove, whilst re-development at Longbridge, the Central
Technology Belt proposals for Birmingham University / Queen Elizabeth Hospital,
and re-development of Pebble Mill will all add to travel demand on the A38
corridor. These development proposals are all well located for access to the rail
47

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
network, although capacity issues on local rail services will need to be addressed
to maximise the potential for such use. This reinforces the need to improve
Bromsgrove Railway Station to make it more attractive, allied to improved rail
services serving the town.
In addition, the Bromsgrove District Local Plan identifies future development as
being directed towards the western side of the town, in the Perryfields area.
There is no programme for such development at this stage, and this will be
subject to review when the District Council considers its Local Development
Strategy. This process is underway and will require the completion of a transport
study, including an accessibility assessment, to assess the best strategy, in
transport terms, for future housing and employment requirements.
A particular consideration will be the impact of new development on the
congested A38 route through the town, and the need to improve the railway
station facilities as well as access to the station.
The District Council has also undertaken a Town Centre audit within Bromsgrove,
and this has identified a need for enhancement. The Town Centre Study (April
2004) highlighted that:
• Bromsgrove town centre sits in the shadow of other major shopping
destinations.
• Bromsgrove has an attractive town centre, but this requires enhancement with
improved pedestrian accessibility and improved car parking.
• Specific areas for improvement were identified through stakeholder
consultation, including a workshop. These include the need to improve the
bus station.
• A quantitative need for additional comparison and convenience goods space
was identified.
To assist with the implementation of these conclusions, the LTP2 strategy will
support improvements to Bromsgrove town centre, notably through investment in
better passenger transport facilities at the railway and bus stations.
Malvern Hills
Malvern Hills is a diverse District that forms the western boundary of
Worcestershire. The main urban area is Malvern itself, and proposed
development is concentrated on this town, notably on two brownfield sites at
DERA North where a mixed use development is proposed, and at QinetiQ /
Malvern Science and Technology Park where further high technology
employment is being encouraged. The third phase of the Science Park is due to
be completed in early 2007, creating an estimated 130 jobs and providing 44,000
square feet of accommodation for technology companies. Both these sites are
reasonably located with respect to access to public transport and local facilities,
but have constrained highway networks that will mean that traffic generation
could cause local congestion and safety concerns.
Elsewhere, the market towns of Upton-upon-Severn in the South and Tenbury
Wells in the North are focii for wider rural areas. In the case of Tenbury in
48

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
particular, this spills out into the neighbouring Counties of Herefordshire and
Shropshire. Access to facilities is a critical issue for these communities.
Strategic access to the Malvern Hills District is constrained by the limitations of
crossing the River Severn, whilst an increasingly elderly population mean that
public and community transport provision is becoming ever more important to
prevent people become housebound.
The Vision 21 Local Strategic Partnership has taken an active interest in
transport issues, and in particular the interaction between transportation, jobs and
housing supply within the District. In particular, high local house prices mean that
younger people are often forced to commute longer distances to access jobs
within the Malvern area, thereby adding to the pressure on the transport network.
A key element of future development plans will be the need to seek to minimise
the need to travel by providing affordable housing nearer to the planned
employment sites within the District.
Malvern Hills District Council has recently adopted the following vision for the
future development of the District:
A District which has first class services and facilities, is clean, safe, healthy
and prosperous, and has vibrant and active communities
The objectives supporting this vision include working with partners to achieve “a
connected District” through improved transport and communications
infrastructure, whilst priorities include local transport and town centre
enhancement. LTP2 will seek to support this vision through investment in
improvements within Malvern, the market towns transportation initiative and the
Worcester City package.
Redditch
Redditch suffers from fewer of the constraints on transport than other areas of the
County, with generally good public transport networks (but not necessarily
matched with bus services operating throughout the day), walking links, and little
traffic congestion. Much of this is due to its major development in the second half
of the 20 th Century as a designated “New Town”, planned to take overspill
population from the West Midlands conurbation, which resulted in a major
investment in new transportation networks.
Future development is concentrated to the north of the town, with the major
proposals being the commercial leisure development proposed for the Abbey
Stadium site. This was the subject of a Public Inquiry in November 2005, with the
outcome of the Inquiry expected in Spring 2006.
The outcome will have a significant influence on the implementation of the LTP2
strategy for the Redditch area, as the development has been shown to have
significant implications for the local transport network, requiring major investment
in the improvement of the A441 route to the north of Redditch. This would
involve the construction of the Bordesley Bypass, a strategic road scheme
proposed within the Worcestershire Structure Plan but not of sufficient priority to
warrant construction within the LTP2 period if the Abbey Stadium development
were not to go ahead. However, Redditch Borough Council and the developer of
49

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
the Abbey Stadium proposals have committed to provide the bulk of the funding
for the transport strategy should the development be approved.
In the South-east of the town, the implications of the revocation of the Line
Orders for the A435 Studley Bypass will need consideration through the LTP2
strategy, in conjunction with Warwickshire County Council and the Highways
Agency (HA). The road network in South-east Redditch suffers from traffic
congestion, as well as the A435(T) through Studley and other settlements in
Warwickshire, and there is a need to review these issues and identify an
appropriate way forward now that the Bypass proposal has been dropped by the
HA.
One of the issues to be considered in South-east Redditch is accessibility of the
Alexandra Hospital, and the need to seek to reduce car use for travel to the site.
Worcester
The greatest emerging pressures on the transport network within the County are
concentrated upon Worcester. The current Local Plan already contains a number
of development proposals that will add to existing transport pressures within the
city, and other development proposals are coming forward as follows:
• Employment Sites – Worcester Woods, Grove Farm, Tolladine Goods Yard,
Newtown Road corridor
• Housing Developments – Diglis Basin, Earls Court, Worcester Porcelain,
various smaller proposals.
• Retail Development – Lowesmoor
• University College expansion onto former Hospital site
• Library proposals adjacent to new UCW site
These proposals potentially amount to around 1,200 residential units and
significant additional employment land. The developments at Grove Farm and
Earls Court are on the Western side of the River Severn, and will therefore add to
existing traffic pressure on the existing river crossings. The University and
Library proposals will also lead to the creation of an estimated 1,250 jobs in the
centre of Worcester, as well as injecting an estimated £60 million per year into
the local economy.
The greatest opportunity to manage this additional travel demand is through the
Sustainable Travel Town project, which commenced in 2004/05 and has funding
through to 2008/09. This project is described in greater detail within the LTP2
strategy, but the baseline survey work highlights the opportunities that exist for
modal shift for local journeys within the city with suitable investment, through the
LTP2 and developer funding, in the necessary infrastructure in addition to
revenue funding for marketing / promotional activity and public transport services.
Experience from the Sustainable Travel Town project will be used to develop the
approach taken to promotion of sustainable travel across the County, and in
particular through the design and marketing of new developments, travel planning
activity and supporting infrastructure.
50

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The city also has great potential as a tourism destination, with the Cathedral,
River Severn and a historic city centre providing many attractions for the visitor in
addition to sporting attractions such as the race course, cricket ground and rugby
club. With the proposed University expansion and library project leading to the
development of a learning quarter in the city centre, it is increasingly desirable to
reduce the impact of traffic on the city centre environment.
Worcester City Council has submitted a bid for Landmark funding from the
national lottery for a £25 million project to improve Worcester’s environment by
creating a riverside park that seeks to maximise the public use of this asset. The
project includes the construction of two new bridges over the River Severn for
pedestrians and cyclists, one at Diglis to the south of the city centre, the other to
the north. This proposal would also complement the new University campus and
the new County Library referred to above, and would see the creation of new
public space alongside these developments. The City Council will know if the bid
has been long-listed in Spring 2006.
Beyond the LTP2 period, the sub-regional role that Worcester has through RSS
will undoubtedly result in further pressure upon the local transport network. A
combined transport and land use study will be required to identify the appropriate
strategy for both the siting of additional housing and employment sites, and the
transport strategy required to manage future travel demand. This study will be
completed by 2007 to fit in with the partial review of RSS, and will result in the
identification of the long-term transport strategy for the Worcester area. This is
likely to require significant future investment in transport within the Worcester
area, and a major scheme funding bid can be anticipated to permit
implementation of the strategy during the LTP3 period (2011-16).
Wychavon
Wychavon is a predominantly rural District with local facilities being focussed on
the three market towns of Droitwich, Evesham and Pershore. Planned future
development is also concentrated on these towns, other than the proposed
employment site at Throckmorton Airfield to the North of Pershore.
The main policy focus within the District is the enhancement and regeneration of
the market towns, and in particular ensuring that the range of facilities to serve
their local communities and rural hinterland are maximised. LTP2 will seek to
support these policies by ensuring that transport improvements are progressed
within these settlements, and that access to facilities is improved.
The further development of the agricultural sector will place potential
environmental pressures upon local communities, with heavy goods traffic
travelling along sub-standard routes, and therefore the LTP2 strategy will seek to
ensure that these impacts are minimised through the implementation of
appropriate policies. The Vale of Evesham Freight Quality Partnership, formed
jointly with neighbouring authorities and seeking to provide links between freight
operators and local communities, will be an important mechanism to achieve an
improved local environment.
Within Wychavon, there are also various visitor attractions such as Hanbury Hall
and the village of Broadway, which lies within the Cotswold AONB area. The
Droitwich Canal re-opening will also bring more tourists into the area, as will the
51

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
proposed extension of the Gloucestershire and Warwickshire Railway to
Broadway.
Wyre Forest
The Wyre Forest area contains the three main towns of Bewdley, Kidderminster
and Stourport-on-Severn, which have a high level of interaction due to their
proximity. The main employment site identified through the Local Plan is the
former British Sugar site, which is located between Kidderminster and Stourporton-Severn
and forms part of the Stourport Road Employment Corridor identified
as a priority for re-development within the Worcestershire Economic Strategy.
This 24 hectare site is programmed for development during the LTP2 period and
beyond, and will place significant pressure upon the transport network, which
suffers from peak hour congestion in both Kidderminster and Stourport-on-
Severn.
The situation in Stourport-on-Severn has already been the subject of a
transportation study that identified traffic congestion as a major local problem.
The identified solution, the Stourport Relief Road, is costed at £47 million, and
although it demonstrates a positive Benefit to Cost ratio and represents value for
money, it is recognised that this scale of funding is unlikely to be available for
such a scheme in the LTP2 period.
Therefore, a further transportation study will be undertaken for the Wyre Forest
area, to identify the appropriate transport strategy that is necessary to allow the
economic regeneration of the Stourport Road corridor to be achieved. The
outcome of this study is likely to be a major scheme funding bid for the identified
strategy for implementation during the LTP3 period (2011-16).
Wyre Forest District Council and AWM have also published an Economic and
Development Regeneration Strategy for Kidderminster, which identifies how
these bodies wish to see the town develop in the future. In addition to the British
Sugar site, key employment sites include the Clensmore Street area to the north
of the town centre, access to which is predominantly via the A451 Horsefair. This
is a designated Air Quality Management Area, and therefore any re-development
of this area will require a transport strategy that will result in a reduction of traffic
within Horsefair.
Further development is also planned for Kidderminster town centre, which has
undergone major changes in recent years. This will seek to enhance the town
centre as a retail and leisure destination, and will place greater demands upon
the local transport network, particularly as evening bus services within the town
are limited at present.
Within Stourport-on-Severn, a number of development sites within the town
centre are coming forward, with a mix of residential, employment and retail uses
proposed. These sites include the Lichfield Basin Canal development which will
see the restoration of one of Stourport-on-Severn’s canal basins alongside a new
housing development. These developments will add pressure to the already
congested local road network, and place greater importance upon the promotion
of sustainable travel for local journeys.
52

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Bewdley and Stourport-on-Severn are both part of the market towns
transportation initiative and a key area for development is the growth of both
towns as visitor destinations.
3.13 CROSS BOUNDARY ISSUES
Analysis of data and the consultation process have identified a wide range of
cross-boundary issues that will influence the LTP2 strategy. Not all of these are
confined within the West Midlands Region, as Worcestershire’s links with
Gloucestershire can be equally important for some transport corridors and for the
Southern part of the County. The table below summarises the major crossboundary
issues that are relevant to the strategy:
Neighbouring Cross-boundary Issues
Authority
Birmingham City • New Street Station – the need for improvements to the station to tackle
the existing poor environment, limited passenger capacity and to
improve train capacity
• Longbridge – following the demise of MG Rover, the re-development of
the Longbridge area becomes even more important. The MG Rover
works were an important employer for Worcestershire residents, and
any re-development of the site will be equally important for
Worcestershire. Accessibility to the area is an important issue and the
County has worked with the City Council and other partners on the
Longbridge Link Road feasibility study.
Gloucestershire
County Council
• Central Technology Belt – the high-technology corridor runs from
Birmingham city centre through to Malvern, and the two authorities are
therefore key players in the delivery of the corridor’s objectives.
• Strategic Park and Ride – Centro (the body responsible for passenger
transport provision within the West Midlands conurbation, are promoting
strategic Park and Ride sites that serve the city. Potential facilities
include a major Park and Ride site at Longbridge Station, which would
undoubtedly be used by Worcestershire residents, and potential sites at
Quinton, and near Hollywood.
• Frankley Rail Line extension – Birmingham City Council have also
developed proposals for an extension of the Cross-city line to Frankley,
using an existing freight line. This would again be potentially be used by
Worcestershire residents, as well as being likely to alter service patterns
which could include Redditch – Lichfield services.
• Birmingham to Bristol Rail Corridor – potential for a new Parkway
Station at Gloucester as well as the County Council’s own proposal for a
Worcester Parkway station. A jointly funded study has built on previous
work undertaken by the Strategic Rail Authority looking at the
cumulative impact of both stations on existing rail services. Both
authorities will seek to work together to achieve a package of station
and line improvements that will have mutual benefits for both areas.
• Cotswold Line – the Worcester – Oxford – London line serves a
number of different authorities, and this is reflected in the wide
membership of the Cotswold Line Promotion Group. Both authorities
have an interest in seeing improvements to the line.
• Vale of Evesham Freight Quality Partnership – along with
Warwickshire County Council and a number of District Councils,
Worcestershire and Gloucestershire are both key members of this
partnership considering the impact of freight movement on local
communities across the Vale of Evesham.
• M5 / A46 / M50 – the management of these strategic routes is obviously
of key interest to both authorities.
• Cotswold AONB – both authorities are Members of the Cotswold
AONB Transport Working Group.
53

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Herefordshire
Council
• Hereford – Worcester railway – the improvement of services along this
line is a key priority for both authorities.
• Malvern Hills AONB – this area straddles the boundary between the two
authorities.
• Accessibility Strategy – there are important cross-boundary accessibility
issues where residents of one authority are accessing facilities in the other
area. This is particularly important in the Tenbury Wells area, and in the
Ledbury – Malvern area.
• West Mercia Safety Camera Partnership – the organisation responsible
for speed limit enforcement using camera equipment across the West
Mercia police force area, which includes Herefordshire, Shropshire and
Telford & Wrekin as well as Worcestershire.
Shropshire
County Council
• Accessibility Strategy – as with Herefordshire, the links between the
Tenbury area, South Shropshire and Herefordshire are important in terms
of access to services, and the authorities need to work together to promote
improved passenger transport services linking key communities such as
Tenbury, Leominster and Ludlow.
• West Mercia Safety Camera Partnership – see above under
Herefordshire.
Warwickshire • Cotswold Line – see above under Gloucestershire.
• Vale of Evesham Freight Quality Partnership – see above under
Gloucestershire.
• A46 Trunk Road – see above under Gloucestershire.
• A435 Studley Bypass – following the decision to drop this scheme, there
is a need for the two authorities to work together with the Highways
Agency to resolve transport problems affecting communities along the
A435 corridor, and on linking routes from the A435 into Redditch.
• Stratford – Cheltenham Railway – this line passes through
Worcestershire, although only part of it is currently in use. Any scheme to
re-open this line would require a partnership approach involving the two
authorities alongside Gloucestershire.
• Cotswold AONB – see above under Gloucestershire.
In addition to these specific issues, the County Council also participates in a wide
range of benchmarking groups, regional working parties etc. to share knowledge
and information on transport issues with other local authorities across the Region
and on a national basis. Within the LTP2 strategy, those policies and schemes
on which joint working with neighbouring authorities is required are highlighted in
the Implementation Plan.
3.14 STRATEGIC TRANSPORT NETWORK
LTP2 identifies the transportation strategy for Worcestershire, and will inevitably
have a strong focus upon the local transport network within the County.
However, this cannot be considered in isolation from the national transport
networks that pass through the County and serve the County by providing
national and international connections. The elements of the national network are
as follows:
• Strategic Highway Network – Trunk Roads and Motorways
• Rail Network
• Airports
• Inland Waterways and Ports
54

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The main issues that need to be considered when developing the LTP2 strategy
in relation to these networks are summarised below.
3.14.1 Strategic Highway Network
Within Worcestershire, the strategic highway network consists of the M5, M42
and M50 motorways and the A46 (T) Trunk Road that links the M5 near
Tewkesbury with the M40 at Warwick. Responsibility for the management of
these routes lies with the Highways Agency (HA).
The HA is also currently responsible for the management of the A435 (T), A449
(T) and A456 (T) routes within Worcestershire, but these have been identified as
non-core Trunk Roads and procedures are already underway to hand
responsibility for these routes to the County Council. These processes are likely
to be completed within the LTP2 period.
The main issues affecting the Trunk Road network within Worcestershire are
summarised below:
M5 motorway
The M5 forms the strategic highway route connecting the Midlands with Southwest
England. It was widened to three lanes in each direction between 1985 and
1993 and is generally free flowing under normal conditions. However, lane
closures due to road works or accidents along any section of the M5 invariably
result in significant congestion both on the motorway and on the local highway
network as traffic seeks to find alternative routes. This can cause particularly
severe problems on those sections of the local network prone to congestion,
notably within Worcester and Bromsgrove.
55

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Therefore, the supply of good information on planned works and unplanned
incidents, and the careful choice of suitable diversionary routes, is critical to
minimising the impact of such incidents on the local highway network. This
emphasises the need for close communications between the Network Control
Manager at the Council and their equivalent at the Highways Agency’s Regional
and National Traffic Control Centres.
The HA has identified Junctions 3, 5, 6 and 7 of the M5 as having congestion
problems, especially at the weekday peak periods. At Junction 6 (Worcester
North), the junction was partially signalised in 2005 in a jointly funded scheme
involving the HA and Worcestershire County Council. The twin objective of this
scheme was to ease the congestion at peak periods, and tackle safety problems
on the A4440 arm of the junction.
The potential impact of new development in the Worcester area on the operation
of Junctions 6 and 7 means that the HA will be an essential partner in the further
development of the transport strategy for the city.
Similarly, Junction 4 of the M5 will be potentially affected by the re-development
of the Longbridge Works site, as the A38 from Junction 4 forms the main link into
Longbridge from the motorway network. The HA will again be essential partners
in the development of the access strategy for the Longbridge site.
M42 Motorway
The M42, completed through Worcestershire in 1985, provides the Southern
Bypass for the West Midlands conurbation linking the M5 in North Worcestershire
through to the M40, M6, and the East Midlands. As well as being a major
through route, it has contributed towards making many employment sites and
other trip generators such as the National Exhibition Centre easier to reach by
car from Worcestershire.
Junction 1 of the M42 has been designated as an Air Quality Management Area
(AQMA), and consequently there is a clear need to work with the HA and
Bromsgrove District Council to identify suitable measures that will reduce vehicle
emissions at this junction, as detailed elsewhere in the LTP2 strategy.
The HA has also identified potential congestion problems at Junctions 2 and 3 of
the M42, and should the Abbey Stadium development at Redditch gain approval,
then junction improvements will be required at Junction 2, involving reconfiguration
of the existing signals and road layout.
The Longbridge Access Strategy work referred to above will also impact on the
M42, as one of the options being investigated involves the construction of a new
Link Road connecting the site to Junction 2 via the A441.
The M42 through Worcestershire is also often affected by peak period congestion
on the section of the motorway beyond the M40 Interchange, and the Active
Traffic Management System being introduced by the HA on the M42 is therefore
welcomed by the County Council.
56

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
M50 Motorway
This two lane motorway provides the main route between the Midlands and South
Wales, and generally operates well within capacity. The M50 provides one of the
main crossings of the River Severn within Worcestershire, but there is no direct
access to the motorway from the Worcestershire highway network to the west of
the river. To reach the M50 at Junction 2 near Ledbury, traffic from the Malvern
area needs to cross the Malvern Hills or use unsuitable minor roads. This can be
a significant problem during flooding incidents, when the alternative bridge at
Upton-upon-Severn can be closed. A study into the construction of a new
motorway junction linking the M50 with the A438 concluded that this proposal
would not provide value for money, and therefore this scheme has not been
included within LTP2.
A46 (T)
This Trunk Road connects the M5 at Junction 9 (Tewkesbury) with the M40 at
Warwick, and provides a strategic connection to the motorway network from the
Vale of Evesham. The A46 bypasses Evesham to the east, and is built to a dual
carriageway standard to the north of the town, and single carriageway to the
south. Consultation on a Route Management Strategy for the A46 took place
during 2004, but the strategy has not yet been formally adopted. Key issues
within Worcestershire concern the safety record on the route, particularly at the
roundabouts on the Evesham Bypass.
A449(T)
This route links the M5 at Junction 6 to the County boundary north of
Kidderminster, and provides the main route between Worcester and
Kidderminster. The route is predominantly dual carriageway, although north of
Worcester sections have been narrowed to single lane as part of a road safety
strategy for the route. Just south of Kidderminster, the route is of a lower
standard single carriageway, with traffic signal controlled junctions, and peak
hour congestion occurs at these junctions. The A449 passes through the eastern
part of Kidderminster, and congestion also occurs at junctions on this section,
notably that with the A456. The Highways Agency intends to de-Trunk this route
in April 2007, and early discussions have commenced between the HA and
Worcestershire County Council on this process.
A456(T)
This route links Kidderminster with Birmingham and the M5 at Junction 3. It is a
mixture of dual and single carriageway, and passes through the villages of
Blakedown and Hagley. Congestion occurs, particularly within Hagley at the
junctions with the A450 and A491. Proposals were developed for the
construction of the A456 Kidderminster – Blakedown – Hagley Bypass in the
early 1990’s, but this scheme has now been dropped by the Highways Agency
from their roads programme, and it is expected that the HA will seek to promote
revocation orders for the route line orders as part of the de-trunking process as
the HA intend to de-trunk this route in April 2007 as part of the same process for
the A449(T).
57

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
A435(T)
The A435(T) provides the direct link from the A46(T) at Alcester and the M42
Junction 3, bypassing Redditch to the East. The southern part of the route runs
in Warwickshire, whilst north of the junction with the A4023 it lies within
Worcestershire.
The HA is currently bringing forward plans to de-trunk the A435 (T), and the
County Council will be involved in discussions with Warwickshire and the HA on
the terms of these plans as they progress.
Summary
Accordingly, there will be close liaison with the Highways Agency on the
development of the following LTP2 strategies:
• Worcester Transport Study
• A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road improvements
• Wyre Forest Transport Study
• A441 Bordesley Bypass and Abbey Stadium development
• Longbridge Access Strategy
• M42 Junction 1 AQMA
In addition, the exchange of real time travel information will continue to be crucial,
and in this respect continuing liaison will be required between the National Traffic
Information Centre, which monitors the Trunk Road network, and the County
Council’s Network Control Unit, responsible for traffic management on the local
highway network.
Finally, the terms of the de-Trunking of the A449 and A456 routes will be
negotiated during 2006 as the Highways Agency wish to formally de-Trunk these
routes in April 2007, and therefore it is likely that the responsibility for the
maintenance of these routes will pass to the County Council during the LTP2
period.
58

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.14.2 Strategic Rail Network
Following the 2005 Railways Act responsibility for the overall management of the
rail industry has now passed from the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), which has
been dissolved, to the Department for Transport (DfT). This means that DfT will
be directly responsible for setting strategic policy in relation to the rail industry,
59

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
including directing the way in which rail services are operated and deciding
priorities for major investment in rail infrastructure improvements.
Network Rail, a non-profit making company, has been established by
Government as the body responsible for the management of the rail network
itself, including track, signalling and communications systems, stations and all
other infrastructure associated with the railways, such as bridges and level
crossings. No new rail infrastructure, such as the construction of new railway
stations, can be provided without approval from Network Rail.
Rail services are provided by Train Operating Companies (TOCs), which are
private companies that are awarded rights to operate services on specific
sections of the rail network through the franchising system. DfT are responsible
for the award of franchises, which generally cover geographic areas or specific
routes or types of service.
The Rail Passengers Council (RPC) is the national body responsible for
representing rail users, and Worcestershire is covered by the South-west region
of the RPC.
Therefore, whilst the County Council can influence the provision of rail services in
Worcestershire, there are no direct powers for providing rail services available to
the authority. LTP2 funding can be used to support the improvement of rail
infrastructure, but the delivery of such improvements will generally be outside the
County Council’s control.
Recent work undertaken by the SRA and being continued by the DfT will be
crucial to the development of the rail network within Worcestershire and includes:
• Route Utilisation Strategies – essentially the ten year investment plan for the
rail network. Within Worcestershire, the rail network is covered by two
separate RUS documents, both published during 2005. The Greater Western
RUS includes the Hereford – Malvern – Worcester – London and Worcester –
Gloucester railway lines, whilst the West Midlands RUS covers the Worcester
– Birmingham (via Kidderminster and via Bromsgrove) and the Redditch –
Birmingham routes.
• Regional Planning Assessment – effectively the long term planning document
looking at the 2011 – 2031 period and identifying key land use issues that will
influence the long term development of the rail network. Work on the West
Midlands RPA, which covers Worcestershire, commenced in 2005 and is
ongoing.
• Railways for All – a consultation document published by the SRA outlining
actions to improve accessibility and staffing levels at stations across the
country. This was published in 2005, but the post-consultation document is
yet to be published.
The rail franchises that are relevant to service provision within Worcestershire
are:
• Greater Western – awarded in December 2005 to First Group, this franchise
covers rail services linking Hereford, Malvern and Worcester to London, and
Worcester to Cheltenham, Gloucester and Bristol. The franchisee has
60

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
specific responsibility for the management of Pershore, Evesham and
Honeybourne stations.
• Central Trains – this franchise currently runs through to Autumn 2007, and is
operated by National Express Group. The services included are local
services connecting Worcestershire stations with the West Midlands
conurbation, as well as inter-urban services passing through the County
linking Hereford and Cardiff with Nottingham. DfT are currently proposing to
terminate this franchise in 2007, and replace it with a West Midlands
franchise based on local services within the West Midlands area. This
franchise is responsible for all other Worcestershire stations other than those
listed above.
• Cross-Country – this franchise, currently operated by Virgin Rail, will also be
terminated in Autumn 2007 and replaced with a new Cross-Country
franchise. This may include services within the County such as the Hereford
/ Cardiff to Nottingham services currently operated by Central Trains.
• Chiltern Trains – Chiltern, owned by Laing Rail, currently operate peak hour
trains providing direct connection between Kidderminster and London
Marylebone via Birmingham Snowhill. As part of the re-organisation of the
Central Trains franchise, Chiltern are likely to be given the opportunity to bid
for all rail services connecting Worcester and Kidderminster with Birmingham
Snowhill as an extension of their current franchise.
It is apparent that the current situation relating to the provision of rail services and
management of the rail network is complex within Worcestershire, and the
proposed franchise changes are unlikely to simplify the position. This will make
the tackling of constraints to further rail improvements a challenging task.
Issues relating to the Worcestershire rail network are comprehensively covered in
the Rail Strategy section of the LTP.
61

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
3.14.3 Air Travel
There is no commercial airport within Worcestershire, but access to airports is an
important local issue for residents and businesses. The Government White
Paper on Air Travel, published in 2004, identified expansion of Birmingham
International Airport as the preferred strategy for the West Midlands area, and
BIA published it’s draft Masterplan for consultation in November 2005. This
covers a 30 year period and foresees the construction of a second runway as
well as new terminal buildings to provide additional passenger capacity.
The main issue for Worcestershire is the provision of direct public transport
services connecting the County to the Airport, as at present no direct journey is
possible by rail or bus. Interchange with rail services linking to Birmingham
International station is also difficult for travellers from many parts of the County,
as rail services using Snowhill (from Kidderminster) do not provide easy
connections with services from New Street. The improvement of such
connections is something that will be pursued through the re-franchising process
for the new rail franchises. The County Council will support any measures to
improve surface access, especially by public transport, to the Airport.
Previous proposals for the development of Wolverhampton Business Airport into
a regional facility are not supported within the Government White Paper, and
would have an environmental impact on the north-western area of the County
through increased flight activity. The Airport is not well located for access to the
strategic road and rail networks, and therefore the commercial development of
this facility would not be supported by the County Council as an alternative to the
BIA development.
3.15 CONSULTATION RESPONSES
3.15.1 Public Consultation
The LTP2 consultation process is described in detail in the LTP2 Consultation
Report, which has been published separately and can be viewed on the LTP2
website (www.worcestershire.gov.uk/ltp). The process included questionnaire
surveys, distributed to all local households through the County Council’s free
newspaper, public meetings and specific meetings with interested parties such as
the Local Strategic Partnerships.
The response to the questionnaire survey was reasonable, with 585 returned
questionnaires. Respondents identified a total of 1,264 transport priorities, and
the table below shows these grouped according to the shared priorities. It is
worth noting that these priorities were based on unprompted responses (i.e. the
public were simply asked to list their top three transport priorities rather than
asked to identify these from a prepared list).
62

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Priority Area Number of Comments %age of Total
Accessibility (including 591 47%
buses, rail, walking and
cycling)
Congestion 385 30%
Road Safety 188 15%
Air Quality 25 2%
Asset Management
(Maintenance)
75 6%
This demonstrates that the main concerns expressed related to accessibility, and
in particular the reliability, scope and cost of bus and rail services, and to traffic
congestion.
In addition, the questionnaire asked people to identify the areas where they feel
transport investment should be directed, and the responses were as follows:
Strategy Area %age of total %age of total (exc.
Maintenance)
Improving public transport 25 30
Tackling congestion 20.2 24
Maintenance of roads and 19.3 Not applicable
bridges
Improving Road Safety 13.2 16
Developing walking and 12.8 15
cycling networks
Improving the environment 12.1 15
Collectively, these responses indicate that improving accessibility, particularly
passenger transport, is a local priority for Worcestershire residents, followed by
tackling traffic congestion. The lower figures for road safety and air quality /
environmental issues probably reflect the relatively good safety record that
Worcestershire has achieved in recent years, and the few air quality problems
within the County.
3.15.2 Government Feedback
In the preparation of this final LTP2 strategy, due account has been taken of the
feedback received from the Government Office for the West Midlands (GOWM)
and the Department for Transport (DfT) on the Provisional LTP2. Written
feedback was received in December 2005 with the LTP2 settlement for 2006/07,
but invaluable informal feedback has also been received at various meetings held
during the preparation of this strategy.
63

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The input of GOWM and DfT officials into the preparation of this strategy is
gratefully acknowledged. A summary of the way in which the main comments
provided by these Government Departments has been dealt within this document
is included in Appendix One.
3.16 SUMMARY
The influences upon travel demand within Worcestershire have been explored in
this chapter of LTP2, and the table below provides a summary in the form of a
SWOT analysis of current transport issues.
Strengths:
• Safer Roads with fewer casualties
• Successful School Travel Plan
programme resulting in fewer car trips for
school trips
• Strong partnership with the health sector
• A road network that is generally in good
condition
• Good air quality and pleasant
environment
• Uncongested rural roads
• Comprehensive rights of way network
• Good employment base
• Good local partnerships on key projects
such as Evesham High Street
• Freight Quality Partnerships established
for County and the Vale of Evesham.
• Increasing rail patronage
Opportunities:
• Sustainable Travel Town project in
Worcester
• Worcester Parkway station gives access
to national rail network
• Rail re-franchising gives chance to review
local rail services
• Rights of Way Improvement Plan
• Integrated Passenger Transport strategy
and joint working with District Councils
through the Passenger Transport Forum
• Better use of technology to improve
passenger information and traffic
management
• Central Technology Belt strengthens
employment base
Weaknesses:
• Poor marketing and information on
passenger transport
• Limited access to facilities, particularly in
rural areas
• Congested road network, particularly at
river crossings
• Bridge maintenance backlog
• Unreliable local train services and limited
access to national services
• Gaps in County-wide cycle network
• Declining bus patronage
• Poor disabled access at passenger
transport interchanges
Threats:
• Local bus service withdrawals
• Increased congestion at River crossings
constrains ability to fulfil Regional role
(especially Worcester and Malvern)
• Changes within rail industry hamper
strategic vision
• Increasing congestion on the national
road network creates further problems on
the local network
• Closure of strategic bridges resulting in
major local inconvenience
• Reduced walking and cycling leads to
increased health problems
• Limited funding for investment in
transport
• Greater flooding incidence if climate
change continues unchecked
64

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4 THE STRATEGY
65

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.1 STRATEGY OVERVIEW
The LTP2 strategy is set out in the following section of the document, and is
summarised in the Proposals Map.
The strategy itself is split into two broad areas, those to be applied Countywide
and those that are area based.
For simplicity, the Countywide strategies have been grouped according to the
four shared priorities for transport, as follows:
• Improving Accessibility;
• Tackling Congestion;
• Improving Road Safety, and;
• Improving Air Quality.
Policies have been colour coded to reflect the strategy area that they are most
relevant to. The order of presentation of these strategy areas in this Chapter
reflect the relative priority identified against them during the public consultation,
as reported in the previous Chapter.
The area strategies are based upon the six District Council areas, as follows:
• Bromsgrove;
• Malvern Hills;
• Redditch;
• Worcester City;
• Wychavon, and;
• Wyre Forest.
A further section of the strategy covers Asset Management.
66

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The basic strategy, adopted following analysis of transportation issues,
consideration of how transport and other strategies interact, and consultation with
a wide range of stakeholders, is to:
• Ensure that all residents, visitors and workers in Worcestershire can access
the facilities they need to carry out day-to-day activities by the safest, most
efficient and convenient mode of transport available to them.
• Minimise the impact of all modes of transport upon the local environment, and
seek to reduce vehicle emissions arising from transport activity within
Worcestershire.
• Ensure that traffic congestion within Worcestershire does not constrain
economic activity within the County, reduce the impact of congestion upon
local communities, and ensure that the environmental impact of congestion is
minimised.
• Create a transport network within Worcestershire that is even safer for people
to use.
• Ensure that land use decisions take full account of transport issues and that
community facilities are located to minimise the need for travel for their users.
• Support the future development of the County through initiatives such as the
Central Technology Belt, and Market Towns Transportation Initiative.
• Undertake major transportation studies for the Worcester and Wyre Forest
areas to identify the most appropriate future transport strategy to allow future
development of these areas.
Table 4.1 demonstrates the relative impact that the individual strategy areas will
have upon national, regional and local transport-related policies.
67

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Table 4.1: Impact of LTP2 Strategy on National, Regional and Local
Policies
STRATEGY RSS WP Acc AQ Cong Safety Health Enviro
Accessibility Strategy
Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy
Rail Strategy
Worcestershire Parkway
Rights of Way Improvement Plan
Sustainable Travel Initiatives
Congestion
Intelligent Transport Systems
A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road
Market Towns Transport Initiative
Bordesley Bypass
Safety
Casualty Reduction Schemes
Air Quality
Bewdley
Kidderminster / Bromsgrove
Other
Minor Schemes
Street Clutter Initiative
Monitoring
Asset Management
Structural Maintenance
Bridges
Streetlighting
Key
Strong Impact
Moderate Impact
Slight Impact
Index to Abbreviations:
RSS = Regional Spatial Strategy; WP = Worcestershire Partnership;
Acc = Improving Accessibility; AQ = Improving Air Quality;
Cong = Tackling Congestion; Safety = Improving Road Safety;
Health = Promoting Healthier Communities;
Enviro. = Improving the Environment
68

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2 ACCESSIBILITY
69

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Overview
The work of the Worcestershire Partnership in developing the Community
Strategy for the County has highlighted the importance of easy access to
employment, health, education, leisure, and retail services for all communities,
whether in urban or rural locations. This has been reinforced through the
consultation work undertaken to assist the development of the accessibility
strategy.
The importance of the accessibility strategy is further demonstrated by the wider
public consultation exercise undertaken whilst developing the Provisional LTP2,
with the following graph summarising the relative importance placed upon each of
the shared transport priority areas agreed between central and local government.
Results of Spring 2005 Consultation
15%
6% 2%
47%
30%
Accessibility
Congestion
Road Safety
Maintenance
Air Quality
This clearly shows the extent to which accessibility issues affect the lives of those
that live and work in Worcestershire, hence the importance placed upon
improving accessibility through the LTP2 period.
The ability to travel is vital to achieving an inclusive society. Therefore, the overriding
LTP2 objective is to create a transport network that is equitable and fair for
all, and offers all sectors of the community genuine opportunities to travel. The
specific vision for the accessibility strategy, endorsed by the key stakeholders
involved in developing it, is:
To ensure that people have access to key services at reasonable cost, in
reasonable time, and with reasonable ease, and in a way that promotes
better health for all.
The vision was developed through accessibility workshops attended by key
stakeholders, and refined through comments received on draft versions of the
accessibility analysis. Its broad nature ensures ‘buy-in’ from all partners needed
to deliver the strategy. At the heart of the vision statement is a strong focus upon
social inclusion, ensuring all sectors of the Worcestershire community have equal
opportunity to access essential services.
4.2.1 Objectives
In addressing the overall vision, a set of specific objectives has been developed
that will enable resources to be targeted towards priority areas. Again, these
70

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
have been developed through consultation with key stakeholders, and are
defined as follows:
• To reduce the levels of social exclusion, particularly in the rural areas and the
urban fringes where the problems are most acute.
• To alleviate the impact of deprivation in the most deprived Wards in the
County.
• To offer appropriate transport solutions for the young and the elderly to
ensure the needs of all are accounted for in the delivery of transport solutions.
• To work with stakeholders to ensure that all opportunities are grasped to
deliver improvements in accessibility across the County.
• To create a delivery framework for the accessibility strategy that truly
encompasses all of the stakeholders that have an influence over people’s
access to services.
• To monitor the performance of the accessibility strategy, and to use the
findings to review the strategy at regular intervals to ensure maximum
advantage is gained from the resources invested.
4.2.2 Priorities for Investment
There is clearly a need to focus the investment of the accessibility strategy to
those areas of most need. Through the consultation process sufficient
information has been available to allow the prioritisation of the issues arising. In
summary, the priorities emerging are as follows:
• Access to employment – in particular to focus upon the need to support the
development of the Central Technology Belt.
• Access to healthcare – in particular to consider healthcare in broad terms (as
defined through the health white paper ‘Choosing Health’), recognising the
role of preventative and local care, and the importance of promoting physical
exercise and access to fresh food.
4.2.3 Target Groups
As defined in the vision statement, the accessibility strategy applies to all sectors
of the community, however, there are certain groups for whom accessibility plays
greater importance in their overall quality of life and well being. Those groups
with specific reference to Worcestershire can be defined as:
• Those without access to a car
• Low income groups
• Those living in areas of deprivation
• Less mobile groups (for example disabled persons, those in poor health or
lone parents with pushchairs)
• Those that live in the rural areas with relatively poor levels of bus service
provision
• The young and the elderly
71

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The strategy seeks to ensure that the needs of these specific groups are
addressed, through the appropriate consideration of solutions that target these
specific groups. Given the issues highlighted in the Community Strategy, the
accessibility problems faced by the elderly population, by younger people
(including 16-26 year olds as well as schoolchildren) and by those people without
access to a car are specifically addressed as part of the Accessibility Strategy.
This was confirmed during the consultation process by comments received from
the Older People’s Forum and the Worcestershire Youth Council.
In achieving accessible communities, the following approaches are being
pursued:
• To improve passenger transport and walk / cycle networks to ensure people
can make essential journeys by bus, rail, on foot and by bike as easily and
cheaply as possible.
• To make passenger transport the mode of choice for all or part of a journey
through improvements to the overall package offered to the public.
• To work in partnership with local planning authorities, health, education and
other service providers and developers to ensure that facilities are located in
places easily accessible by their users, and that good accessibility is
maintained in the future.
The full accessibility strategy is reported separately, as an accompanying
document to LTP2. The strategy sets out a clear programme of investment to
improve accessibility based upon the priorities identified above, including the
tasks required by our partner organisations across a range of sectors to ensure
we consider the wider aspects of accessibility, and deliver value for money in our
investment decision.
Within the LTP2 strategy, the key components are:
• Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy;
• Rail Strategy;
• Market Towns Transportation Initiative;
• Walking Strategy
• Cycling Strategy;
• Rights of Way Improvement Plan;
• Employer and School Travel Plans;
In addition, some elements of the Area Strategies will contribute to improving
local accessibility, notably the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town project and
improvements to local public transport facilities (e.g. Bromsgrove Bus Station).
The Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy, being developed in conjunction
with the Passenger Transport Forum, will also form a key element of the
Accessibility Strategy.
One of the important early actions is the formation of the accessibility partnership,
which will take a lead role in delivering the accessibility strategy, bringing
together the range of partners involved, and continuing to evolve the strategy to
72

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
ensure the action plan remains appropriate during the LTP2 period. The first
steps in creating the partnership have been put in place, by expanding the remit
of the successful transport and health partnership.
4.2.4 Accessibility Mapping
The approach to developing the accessibility analysis for Worcestershire is briefly
outlined below. Full details are provided in the separate accessibility analysis
report.
Stage 1: Strategic Accessibility Assessment
In order to begin to understand the accessibility issues faced in Worcestershire, a
number of countywide (strategic) accessibility analyses have been undertaken.
These initially considered access to:
• Health (hospitals and GP surgeries);
• Education (schools and further education);
• Employment (major sites employing over 500 staff);
• Leisure facilities (leisure centres and open countryside); and
• Fresh food stores.
These initial plots mapped accessibility to each service using public transport
routes (based on the data provided for public bus services), and demonstrated
some important initial findings. Two examples of these outcomes are shown
below.
73

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Accessibility by Passenger Transport to Acute Care Hospitals
The map below shows the areas of Worcestershire that are within 60 minutes of
the three main hospitals by passenger transport, and indicates the value of the
investment in improved bus services linking the three Acute Care Hospital sites
that has been jointly made by the National Health Service and the County
Council. (Over the first LTP period, the NHS invested around £1 million to
support these services). The areas of the County that have reasonable
passenger transport access to these sites are within the main towns where the
hospitals are located, and within communities along the linking routes.
It is noticeable that there are significant areas of the County with poor
accessibility to the main hospitals, including market towns such as Evesham and
Pershore. This highlights the necessity of improving passenger transport access
from these areas to the Acute Care Hospitals, as well as ensuring that a wider
range of healthcare facilities are made locally available where possible to reduce
the need to travel to the three main sites. Community Hospital proposals for
Pershore (due to open September 2006), Evesham and Malvern are being
promoted by the South Worcestershire Primary Care Trust, which would provide
improved local facilities that could help to achieve this objective.
74

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Accessibility to Further Education Facilities for 16-19 Year Olds
The accessibility map below shows access to further education facilities for 16-19
year olds, and indicates that outside the main urban areas there is very limited
access to further education facilities for younger people. This could have the
impact of forcing younger people into car ownership if they wish to pursue further
education, or of forcing them out of education. A key part of the accessibility
strategy is aimed at initiatives to tackle problems such as this, for example
through measures such as the introduction of free passenger transport travel for
16-19 year olds as part of the Countywide Concessionary Fares scheme being
developed by the Joint Passenger Transport Forum that has been established
with the District Councils.
75

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Consultation findings
Stakeholder workshops have been an integral part of the development of the
accessibility strategy, involving representatives from a broad range of sectors.
Key issues raised include:
• Evidence of the younger sections of the population (especially 20-24 year
olds) living in the more accessible (urban) locations, with the elderly
population (over 60 and over 75) living in the least accessible (rural) locations.
• With specific regard to health care (and to a lesser extent employment,
education and retail), rural areas to the south, west and central areas of the
County have the poorest levels of accessibility to essential services.
• It is recognised by stakeholders that it is unlikely to be viable to provide
conventional public transport services to satisfy the needs of these particular
rural areas, and that the accessibility strategy must offer a blend of longer
term planning measures (bringing people closer to the services they need),
with shorter term innovative solutions (such as the development of mobile
facilities or taxi-buses).
• There are clear concerns about both the distribution of public transport
services (as defined in the accessibility maps), and the cost, convenience,
reliability and quality of service offered by the existing bus network (as
determined through the stakeholder workshops).
• The likely approach to delivering the accessibility strategy will be through the
existing established partnerships, most notably the 8 Local Strategic
Partnerships and the Transport and Health Partnership.
Stage 2: Local Accessibility Assessments
Stage 2 provided the opportunity to undertake more detailed mapping of local
issues, and the investigation of possible solutions arising from the Stage 1 work
and subsequent stakeholder workshop. The specific areas examined in detail
are:
Health care
• Impact of enhancing the network of community hospitals
• Impact of access to Gloucester Hospital
• Impact of the Worcestershire Neighbourhood Networks (formerly the Network
for Older People)
• Access to ‘out of hours’ healthcare
Employment
• Impact on Leominster Enterprise Park to the west of the County boundary
• Access to Longbridge re-development sites
76

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Social Inclusion
• Accessibility (for all service areas) to/from the Oldington and Foley Park area
in Kidderminster (Neighbourhood Management Pathfinder Project).
Innovation
• The use of accessibility mapping to inform the feasibility of a potential car
club for Worcester.
Stage 3: Option appraisal and identification of resources
Having completed the Stage 2 mapping, and discussed the findings with
stakeholders at the Stage 2 workshop, Stage 3 formally appraised the evolving
options, and identifies the type and level of resources (across all agencies)
necessary to deliver the options.
Stage 4: Accessibility action plan development
Having evaluated the options, Stage 4 sets out an action plan for the delivery of
the accessibility strategy. The action plan is focussed on the high level role of
accessibility planning, and will be further refined with additional detailed schemes
included within the action plan as the accessibility partnership develops. The
action plan can be summarised as:
Task
Lead
responsibility
Stakeholder
involvement
Cost
Timeframe
Formation of
Accessibility
Partnership
WCC / PCT
LSP’s to take
role in wider
dissemination
Revenue
funding for
officer time
to manage
partnership
February
2006
onwards
Use of accessibility
mapping to inform
land-use planning
decisions
WCC
District
Planning
Authorities
Revenue
funding to
undertake
option
appraisal /
modelling
work
On-going
Use of accessibility
mapping to inform
the development of
public transport
networks / review
of public transport
revenue support
WCC
Bus
Operators
Revenue
funding
2006
77

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Task
Lead
responsibility
Stakeholder
involvement
Cost
Timeframe
Use of accessibility
mapping to inform
the LTP2 delivery
programme
WCC Halcrow Revenue
funding
April 2006
onwards
Greater details on these actions are given below.
4.2.4.1 Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership
The impetus behind the creation of a new Worcestershire Accessibility
Partnership (WAP) has come from two main sources. The first has been the
development of the Accessibility Strategy, as described above, and the clear
need identified for such a Partnership to take the lead role in the implementation
and further development of the Strategy. This need was identified by
stakeholders, but at the same time there was strong concern that the outcome
should not be simply the creation of another Partnership to duplicate the work of
existing Partnerships within Worcestershire.
The second source has been the change in funding arrangements for rural
transport projects. Previously, Government funding for rural transport has been
managed by the Countryside Agency, but following structural changes in the way
in which Government agencies for rural affairs operate, this responsibility has
passed to Advantage West Midlands (AWM).
In February 2006, AWM published their proposals for the management of this
responsibility, as part of the Rural Access to Services Programme for 2006-09. A
key element of this programme is the establishment of six sub-regional Rural
Access to Services Partnerships (RASPs) across the West Midlands, with
Worcestershire forming a single RASP. It is planned that the Worcestershire
Accessibility Partnership will logically be the RASP for the Worcestershire subregion.
Worcestershire County Council will co-ordinate the WAP, and will enter into a
Contract with AWM for the delivery of certain activity during the three year period
through to 2009. AWM has announced indicative funding levels to assist the
work of the RASP, as well as publishing targets for specific activities. These are
summarised below.
Category 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 Three Year Total
Funding
Capital Funding £85,000 £105,000 £105,000 £295,000
Revenue Funding £220,000 £210,000 £210,000 £640,000
Total Funding £305,000 £315,000 £315,000 £935,000
Targets
People Assisted 150 280 340 770
Businesses Assisted 4 6 7 17
78

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
AWM has specified that a minimum of £95,000 each year must be invested in the
Wheels to Work scheme, whereby people living in rural areas who have difficulty
accessing employment opportunities are given transport assistance where they
have no means of private transport and limited access to passenger transport.
Such assistance can be in the form of a loan of a moped, with appropriate levels
of training in the use of the vehicle, or through assistance with journeys by taxi.
This level of investment will enable the scheme to be expanded within
Worcestershire, and there is a desire to extend the scheme to cover those areas
of the County classed as the urban fringe, as the accessibility mapping work has
illustrated that people living in such areas can have equally significant difficulties
in accessing employment opportunities.
Other areas that AWM wish to see targeted are rural businesses, which may
need support to develop Travel Plans to help them get employees to their site.
These areas of activity will not form the sole workload of the WAP, however, as
the work completed to date has identified a wide range of other accessibility
issues that need to be tackled.
The membership of the WAP will be drawn from a wide range of organisations
covering the local authority, employment and health sectors in particular,
reflecting the relative priorities identified during the consultation process. The
wider stakeholder meetings held during the consultation process are likely to form
a suitable forum for a reference group to provide two-way feedback on progress
with the implementation and further development of the Accessibility Strategy.
Policy ACC1: Establish a Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership to
oversee the ongoing development and implementation of the Accessibility
Strategy. The Strategy will be reviewed on an annual basis.
Policy ACC2: Use accessibility mapping to identify transport problems
experienced by specific sectors of the population, and work with relevant
agencies through the Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership to address
those problems.
4.2.4.2 Accessibility and Land Use Planning
The accessibility strategy refers to the need to ensure that land use decisions
that are taken by the Local Planning Authorities will reduce the need to travel by
locating services closer to the people they serve, and vice versa. Whilst such
decisions will generally have an impact on travel patterns that will be slow to
detect over the LTP2 period, they are likely to have a significant effect over the
time-frame of the Regional Spatial Strategy.
Within the Council’s Design Guide for Transportation in New Developments,
currently under review and due to be published in 2006, the need for an
Accessibility Assessment, using the Accession software, will be a requirement for
any development proposals likely to generate significant travel demand. This has
been taken as any development exceeding the thresholds identified within
PPG13 Annex D (Maximum Parking Standards) and for housing developments of
100 units or more.
79

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Each of the Local Planning Authorities within Worcestershire is at a different
stage with the Local Development Plans. Five of the District Councils either have
a recently adopted Local Plan covering the LTP2 period, or are in the final stages
of adoption following Public Inquiries. Bromsgrove District Council has
commenced work on a Local Development Framework (LDF) under the new
planning system.
The County Council will require major land use allocations that are made within
the next round of LDFs to include an Accessibility Assessment to ensure that the
most accessible site is identified for significant new development proposals.
Policy ACC3: Use accessibility mapping as a key element of future land use
planning when assessing transportation needs of future development plans
and of major development proposals.
4.2.4.3 Accessibility and Passenger Transport Networks
The accessibility tools used in the development of the Accessibility Strategy will
also provide supporting analysis for the review of passenger transport networks
across the County, as part of the Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy. It is
recognised that this area of work will develop further through the LTP2 period as
the use of the Accession software becomes more reliable, with better informed
and developed database information, and an improve way of dealing with nonroute
specific modes of transport notably Community Transport and Demand
Responsive Transport, which cannot be easily modelled at present.
4.2.4.4 Accessibility and LTP2 Delivery
Accession will also form one of the tools to be used for assessing the overall
impact of the LTP2 strategy upon travel patterns across Worcestershire. As
explained in Chapter 6, a specific LTP2 target for accessibility has been set,
which relates to accessibility to employment opportunities, and this will form the
cornerstone of the accessibility strategy monitoring. The main Accessibility
Strategy report, however, contains details of a wide range of other indicators that
will be monitored to track progress with the delivery of the accessibility strategy
element of the LTP2.
4.2.5 Mobility Issues
Overview
The work undertaken for the Accessibility Strategy described above has focussed
upon access to facilities for all sectors of the community. It is recognised that
there are people who are unable to travel easily either through physical or mental
disability, or other factors such as age.
Creating a Barrier-free Transport Network
The barriers to travel for people with disabilities range from the lack of step-free
routes which are suitable for use by wheelchair users or by older people who
have difficulty climbing steps, to having a passenger transport system which is
easy to use by all sectors of society. Achieving the latter will require investment
in infrastructure, such as the installation of lifts or ramped footbridges at railway
80

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
stations and the provision of accessible bus stops with higher kerbs. Staff
operating passenger transport services will also need to be highly trained in
dealing with people who have a disability.
The Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 introduces a requirement that all new
transport infrastructure and vehicles should meet certain minimum standards to
ensure that less mobile sectors of the community are not excluded from using
transport services. However, the deadlines for meeting these standards for some
sections of the transport sector are beyond the LTP2 period.
The County Council will seek to ensure that LTP2 funding is used only to support
transport schemes and strategies that will lead to the enhancement of the
transport network, and will promote improved accessibility for all sectors of the
community.
This means that, for example, new passenger transport facilities will be designed
so as to be fully accessible to all potential users of the service, and new
infrastructure such as pedestrian crossings will be designed so that all people
can use them regardless of the level of their own mobility.
Equally, any vehicles purchased using County Council funding for passenger
transport purposes will be required to be fully accessible to all potential users.
The County Council will also work with District Councils to ensure that new
developments and existing off-street car parks are provided with an appropriate
level of dedicated car parking for disabled people (those eligible for a Blue
Badge), with the objective of ensuring that 5% of car parking is available for Blue
Badge holders.
Additionally, within the Transportation Asset Management Plan, there will be a
specific requirement that all highway and footway maintenance schemes will
implement improvements to the network to make it more accessible for all users.
An example would be the introduction of dropped kerb crossings where footways
are re-constructed.
Policy ACC4: All transport schemes funded through LTP2 will be designed
to ensure compliance with construction standards to promote accessibility
for all sectors of the community.
Policy ACC5: All passenger transport vehicles purchased using County
Council funding will need to comply with the current standards in relation
to accessibility.
81

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.6 Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
4.2.6.1 Vision
To have a world-class passenger transport network that meets the needs of
the people of Worcestershire in all their journeys, including work,
education, health, and leisure.
Which translates as a passenger transport system that is:
• Easy to use
• Based on reliable and regular services
• A quality alternative to using the car
• Affordable and accessible
• Operated by vehicles and has waiting areas that are modern, comfortable,
safe and which meet public expectations
• Supported by clear information for passengers
• Supported by ticket systems that make sense to passengers, and
• Reflective of modern lifestyles
This can only be achieved in partnership with those involved in all elements of
passenger transport provision, including bus and rail operators, community
transport providers, taxi operators and those responsible for managing passenger
transport infrastructure.
The challenge within LTP2 is to reverse the decline in bus travel experienced
through the first LTP period (2001-06), as indicated in the graph below, and to
attract car users to passenger transport, through the Project Express initiative,
which is summarised in the box below:
82

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• The Project Express concept is based on the development of a network of
high quality, high frequency (minimum 3 buses per hour, inter-urban, 6 buses
per hour in urban areas) Express Bus Services linking key towns, cities,
health, employment, education, retail and tourist facilities and destinations in
Worcestershire. Key interchange hubs will be provided on the network
enabling people to access the services by a variety of transport modes,
including feeder bus, taxibus, shared taxi services, on foot and by cycle and
by car (either as a driver or passenger). The aim will be to provide a high
quality travelling experience for users to encourage modal shift from car to
passenger transport. The concept includes;
•
• Customer Service – Friendly, customer focussed staff at interchange sites
and on the buses
• Vehicles – High quality, low floor, single deck buses, with potential use of
articulated buses such as "StreetCar" on high volume routes. The new
vehicles will represent a step-change in quality and image in comparison with
existing buses
• Interchange Facilities – The facilities for passenger and operators at major
interchange hubs must be consistent with the aim of providing a world-class
level of service
• Route Infrastructure – The Project Express bus services will operate on a
limited stop basis between the interchanges and the city centre. The services
will stop only at key locations such as interchange hubs, the Worcestershire
Royal Hospital and railway stations. High quality facilities and information
systems will be provided for passengers at these key stops
• Information and Marketing – Reliable and accessible information on the
Project Express services, timetables and fares will be provided. The service
will be actively promoted within its target markets
• Simple and Effective Pricing – Easily understandable ticket pricing,
integrated with other passenger transport services, including local bus,
express coach, rail and taxibus/shared taxi services
An early priority will be the development of the new Integrated Passenger
Transport Strategy, based on the Project Express ‘proof of concept’ initiative
within Worcester, which, allied to the Sustainable Travel Town project, is be
aimed at achieving a major improvement in the passenger transport system
within the city and then rolling out to the rest of the county. The map below shows
the major public transport proposals for Worcester.
83

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy will be developed through the Joint
Members Forum and the Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership (for information
on partnership see below).
Experience with the introduction of Phase One of Project Express within
Worcester in September 2005 has shown that where investment in high standard
buses and supporting infrastructure has been made, supported by an integrated
approach to car parking with passenger transport and an intensive marketing
campaign, the reversal in bus patronage decline can be achieved. In 2005/06,
bus passenger journeys within Worcestershire have stabilised, and it is forecast
84

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
that around 13.2 million bus passenger journeys will be made, compared to 13
million in 2004/05.
BVPI 102
14,500,000
passenger numbers
14,000,000
13,500,000
13,000,000
12,500,000
12,000,000
2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
target passenger numbers with full project express programme and County wide concessionary
fares scheme
expected passenger numbers with only County wide concessionary fares scheme
The graph below illustrates the increase in passenger journeys on the Worcester
“W routes” operating from the Perdiswell Transport Interchange (formerly the
Worcester North Park and Ride site) in comparison with 2004/2005 over the
September – December period.
BUS PASSENGER JOURNEYS ON 'W' ROUTES
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
2004/5
2005/6
5000
0
15-Jan
8-Jan
1-Jan
25-Dec
18-Dec
11-Dec
4-Dec
27-Nov
20-Nov
13-Nov
6-Nov
30-Oct
23-Oct
16-Oct
9-Oct
2-Oct
25-Sep
18-Sep
11-Sep
Passenger journeys on Project Express services are currently 110% higher than
for the Park & Ride services over the equivalent period in 2004/05. On an
annualised basis this equates to over 500,000 additional passenger journeys.
85

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Active partnership between the County and District Councils, operators and
passenger user groups has also delivered growth in bus demand elsewhere. In
Redditch for example, the Bus Quality Partnership established in 2003 led to a
Passenger Journeys Index (April 2004 = 100)
120
100
80
60
40
100
99
108
99
108
101
Redditch Local Bus Passenger Journeys
C i (April 2004 Index = 100)
103
100
99
89
113 111
109
94
90
93
79 80
85
98
20
0
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
Month
2004/5 2005/6
successful Urban Bus Challenge bid which in turn has resulted in the introduction
of new buses, enhanced services and improved information for passengers. This
has supported a reversal in the previous decline in bus passenger journeys as
shown in the graph below.
In the rural areas of the County, however, a greater focus on innovative
measures will be required, including the increasing use of shared taxis as a
public transport tool, and a combination of demand responsive and enhanced
community transport services to ensure that maximum flexibility is achieved for
travel opportunities in rural communities.
Within Worcestershire, the County Council has a net budget of around £22 million
for the provision of transport services. This covers:
• Support of public bus services
• Provision of Education transport
• Provision of special needs transport (Adult and Children’s Services)
In addition, the Council works with other partners on the delivery of transport in
other service areas, including:
• Concessionary Travel Schemes
• Community Transport
• Health Service – non-emergency transport
• Wheels to Work scheme
86

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The County Council recognises that there is scope for the delivery of these
strands of transport in a more efficient manner, providing a better level of service
for the user of these services for the same overall cost. Therefore, the objectives
outlined above will only be properly achieved through partnership working with a
range of public sector organisations, passenger transport operators, and with
passengers themselves.
Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
Worcestershire County Council formally adopted its existing Bus and Information
Strategy in 2003 and implementation is underway, but in the light of continuing
challenges to increase patronage, reduce congestion and meet accessibility
targets it is evident that a new Strategy is required. Bus subsidy (currently
amounting to nearly £5 million each year) is under increasing pressure as the
cost of operating bus services rises at a rate greater than general inflation, and
as service withdrawals create greater demand for subsidised services. In
addition, congestion in key parts of the county is leading to greater operating
costs both for commercial and subsidised services.
The emerging new strategy acknowledges that in many areas of the County a
traditional approach to providing bus services may be less appropriate for local
community needs, and it may be better to develop schemes such as demand
responsive transport, shared taxis, and enhanced community transport schemes
as well as improving and mainstreaming other innovative schemes such as the
Workwise and ShareLINK schemes already in existence.
LTP2 will support the review and further development of the passenger transport
network, and the accessibility mapping already undertaken during 2005 will help
identify opportunities to ensure that the limited funding available for subsidy of
bus services as well as capital funding coming from the LTP2 is spent to the best
effect.
Policy IPT1: Review the Bus and Information Strategy and replace it with an
Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy which will then be implemented
across the County in partnership with the Integrated Passenger Transport
Joint Members Forum.
4.2.6.2 Partnership Working
The County Council will continue to work in partnership on the development of
passenger transport improvements across Worcestershire. Partnership work is
87

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
led through two key groups, the Integrated Passenger Transport Joint Members
Forum, and the Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership.
Joint Members Integrated Passenger Transport Forum
The aim of this group is to create a Joint Worcestershire Integrated Passenger
Transport Strategy and deliver it for the County and District Councils and their
partners. The group consists of Members and senior officers from each District
and the County. The agreed objectives of this partnership are to:
• To prepare, recommend and have adopted a Joint Worcestershire Integrated
Passenger Transport Strategy by constituent authorities, including the
Statutory Bus and Information Strategy required to be produced by the
County Council;
• To prepare, implement and monitor a Delivery Plan for the Joint
Worcestershire Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy;
• To ensure Worcestershire has a countywide strategic approach to Passenger
Transport ensuring coordination of the work of the sub groups and
partnerships.
• To act as a focus for strategic liaison, partnership development with key
agencies, and to exert regional influence.
The Joint Members Forum also manages all other partnerships established to
tackle specific passenger transport or accessibility issues across the County,
including:
• Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership
• Bus Quality Partnerships
• Rural Transport Partnerships
• Worcester Sustainable Travel Town Demonstration Project Reference Group
• Concessionary Fares Partnership
• Post 16 Education Transport Partnership
Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership
It is envisaged that the Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership will play a key
role in advising the Joint Members Integrated Passenger Transport Forum on the
development and implementation of the Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy. This group will also ensure that the strategy supports the Accessibility
Strategy.
These partnerships will consult and involve passenger transport user groups
such as ADAPT (a local group promoting improved facilities for the disabled), the
Youth Forum and Worcestershire Youth Council on the continuing development
of the Accessibility Strategy.
A broad outline of the partnership is demonstrated as follows:
88

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Local Transport Plan 2
LTP2 Delivery
Accessibility Analysis
Community Strategies
Pilot Projects
Accessibility Partnership
(formerly Transport and
Health Partnership)
Local Area Agreement
Worcestershire Partnership
Six District Local Strategic Partnerships
Transport and Economy Theme Group
Transport Theme Groups
LTP2 will support the work of these partnerships by providing accessibility
mapping support and funding for infrastructure improvements identified by the
partnerships.
Policy IPT2: Work with partners on the Worcestershire Accessibility
Partnership to identify opportunities for the improvement of bus facilities
and services.
4.2.6.3 Bus Stops
The bus stop is generally the first contact that many people will have with the bus
service, and it is important that it provides an attractive first impression. This
includes provision of a high quality shelter, accurate and easily understood
information on services, and that it should actually be easy to board the bus when it
comes. LTP2 funding will be necessary to support the general improvement of bus
stop facilities across the County. The emerging Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy recommends a corridor approach to improving bus stop infrastructure
alongside improvements to specific services.
The Joint Members Forum will agree a county-wide standard for more modern bus
stops, including new shelters and flags where needed. It is possible that County
Council will take on responsibility from the District, Town and Parish councils for all
bus stops in the county to simplify the existing, complex, management arrangements.
Policy IPT3: Ensure a consistent approach to bus stop provision,
management, maintenance and information provision is achieved across
the County.
89

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.6.4 Bus Priority
Traffic congestion and on-street parking problems lead to extended and
unreliable bus journey times. This, in turn, increases the costs of operating bus
services, reduces passenger confidence in bus travel and leads to a spiral of
declining bus demand and revenue. The provision of systematic priority
measures designed to protect buses from the effects of traffic congestion and
minimise the difference between peak and off-peak bus journey times is required.
LTP2 funding will be required to support the development and implementation of
priority measures.
Existing bus priority measures within the County include:
• A38 Barbourne, Worcester – city-centre-bound bus lanes and priority at
signals on the Perdiswell to city centre corridor.
• Lowesmoor, Worcester – short section of bus-only road available at peak
periods only.
• St Johns, Worcester – short section of bus lanes to give priority through
signals.
• Redditch – extensive section of bus-only route that is segregated from the
main road network within the town. Connects Redditch town centre to the
eastern areas of the town.
During the LTP1 period, feasibility studies were completed into possible bus
priority measures at the following locations:
• St Johns, Worcester – contraflow bus lane on New Road to provide a direct
approach to the bridge over the River Severn.
• London Road, Worcester – studies in conjunction with the proposed Park and
Ride site at Whittington
• Newtown Road, Worcester – accumulation of developer funding from various
developments on this corridor into Worcester.
• Blackwell Street, Kidderminster – bus lane on route within town centre
alongside bus stop enhancements.
90

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
None of these schemes has yet been brought forward. However, within
Worcester it is clear that the introduction of bus priority measures to improve the
efficient running of the new network of services is critical to establishing the full
business case for the Project Express initiative. The following priorities have
been identified for the LTP2 period:
• St Johns, Worcester – short sections of bus lanes at signals on the Tybridge
Street gyratory, with a further phase possibly including the contraflow bus
lane on New Road.
• A38 Barborne, Worcester – provision of sections of bus lane in the
northbound direction, where buses currently are delayed in the general traffic
congestion.
• Newtown Road, Worcester – using developer funding from various
developments on this corridor into Worcester to provide bus priority focussed
on the restricted routes under the railway near Shrub Hill Station.
• Urban Traffic Management, Worcester and Kidderminster – implementation of
the Intelligent Transport Systems strategy (see later) will enable the inclusion
of bus priority at traffic signal systems operating within the city and town
centres.
In addition to these specific schemes, opportunities will be taken at other
locations as part of other LTP2 schemes to introduce bus priority measures
where practicable. For example, on the A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road,
the proposed junction improvements on this corridor could incorporate bus
priority in the form of advance signals for buses at Powick Roundabout.
The merits of broadening the categories of vehicles that can use bus lanes to
include other groups such as cyclists, motorcyclists, Heavy Goods Vehicles, or
Multiple Occupancy Vehicles (encouraging car sharers) will be considered on a
case by case basis for each particular scheme. Factors such as safety, the
impact on bus journey times, the impact on traffic flows, and ease of enforcement
will be considered when making decisions on the categories of vehicle to be
permitted to use the facility.
Policy IPT4: Identify key corridors and locations for bus priority, focusing
on areas of greatest congestion and benefit for bus services, and to design
and implement appropriate bus priority schemes.
4.2.6.5 Other Bus Infrastructure
Bus Stations within the County are generally located alongside shopping centres,
and are owned and managed by the operators of those facilities. The County
Council would seek to encourage bus operators to make most efficient use of
these interchanges to ensure that passengers have as seamless a journey as
possible, especially where their journey involves the use of more than one bus
service.
It is recognised that existing bus stations do not provide the most attractive
environment for passengers, and often have sub-standard layouts for operators.
Rental charges for the use of these facilities also discourage operators from
using them.
91

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The bus stations do not tend to be located very close to the railway stations, and
therefore the interchange between modes of travel is not always well managed
from the passenger’s perspective.
Therefore, the County Council will encourage the provision of improved bus / rail
interchanges through appropriate investment in facilities at railway stations, and
will encourage the improvement of bus station facilities within central locations to
provide better interchange points for local bus services.
Policy IPT5: Promote the improvement of existing bus stations and the
provision of better interchange facilities with rail services.
4.2.6.6 Information / Marketing
The County Council is working with operators to place a greater emphasis on
improving the quality and availability of information on passenger transport
services. The introduction of Real Time passenger information through the
Intelligent Transport Systems strategy is a key element of this approach, as
well as the installation of information kiosks at key locations and the improved
supply of information through websites and via mobile phones.
In addition, the County Council will work with operators and other agencies to
improve the marketing of passenger transport within the County, and to identify
areas where joint marketing initiatives can be undertaken. For example, the
Council has recently created a marketing post within the Waste and Passenger
Transport Service with responsibility for the promotion of sustainability in both
these fields of activity.
The Worcester Sustainable Travel Town and Project Express Initiatives have
both launched major marketing campaigns within Worcester during 2005 to
promote sustainable travel, including bus travel, and the benefits of such
intensive marketing has been shown with the increased bus patronage within the
city. The successful techniques used in these campaigns will be used to develop
further campaigns to promote bus travel across the County.
Policy IPT6: Provide better information on bus journeys to the public,
including introduction of Real Time Passenger Information on key routes,
at main locations such as bus stations, and through technology such as
mobile phones.
Policy IPT7: Work with operators to improve marketing of services, and
develop joint initiatives with key destinations such as shopping centres
and tourist attractions.
4.2.6.7 Community Transport
There are a wide variety of Community Transport schemes in existence across
the County, each with a different scope and remit. These schemes provide an
invaluable service to vulnerable sectors of society who have limited options
available for making crucial journeys, such as to healthcare facilities. However,
the number of schemes can lead to inefficiency, both in terms of geographical
92

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
coverage and duplication with public bus services or other transport schemes,
such as County Council education and social services transport.
Community Transport schemes are also coming under increasing pressure as
commercial bus services are withdrawn from certain areas or times of day,
creating additional demand for their services, and as the recruitment of volunteer
drivers becomes increasingly difficult. The driver shortage is exacerbated when
increasing demands mean that drivers need to do more journeys, which can
erode a volunteers pleasure at assisting with the scheme due to the excess time
demands that it imposes.
There is a clear need for the County Council to work with many partners through
the Accessibility Partnership to achieve better co-ordination of these different
transport schemes more closely, and identify improvements that will benefit the
travelling public. The objective will be to integrate the Community Transport
operations with those of all other partner agencies to secure the overall benefits
that measures such as a common booking system could have.
Service Level Agreements have been entered into with all Community Transport
providers, and a focus is on modernising service delivery through the use of
technology, such as the Mobimaster route planning software. A pilot Dial-a-Ride
service has commenced in Redditch backed by the Bus Quality Partnership
through the Step Change in Redditch Bus Challenge project.
Policy IPT8: Work with other partners on the Worcestershire Accessibility
Partnership to ensure that community transport and voluntary transport
schemes are co-ordinated with wider public transport provision.
4.2.6.8 Concessionary Fares
The provision of Concessionary Travel schemes is a statutory function of the
District Councils within Worcestershire. Each District has tended to support a
scheme with slightly different rules, and therefore in the past residents in various
parts of Worcestershire have had varying travel opportunities as a result. Some
residents might be able to use their concession to travel throughout the County,
whereas others could simply travel within a single District.
The Government announced in 2005 that from 1 st April 2006, a new national
concessionary travel scheme would apply giving a standard minimum level of
service for those eligible. This standard effectively gives all people of 60 years
and over the right to free bus travel after 9.30 a.m. on weekdays, and all day at
weekend and Bank Holidays, for journeys made within the District area in which
they live.
In Worcestershire, the Joint Worcestershire Integrated Passenger Transport
Forum has made the introduction of a countywide concessionary travel scheme a
priority action. As a result, in February 2006, all District Councils, supported by
the County Council, have agreed to introduce a countywide concessionary travel
scheme from April 2006 which:
Gives free bus travel for any resident over 60 years old for journeys made
within Worcestershire at any time of day
93

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
This extends the national minimum scheme by permitting free peak period bus
travel for this age group, and by enabling countywide journeys to be made rather
than restricting the concession to journeys made within each District only. This
approach, jointly funded by all seven authorities, will provide extra benefits to
local residents qualifying for the concession, and remove some of the anomalies
that would otherwise have existing, especially regarding travel to central facilities
such as the main hospitals where cross-boundary travel would inevitably be
required.
As well as journeys made within the County, any single bus journey made which
either starts or finishes within Worcestershire is also eligible, allowing residents to
travel to destinations such as Birmingham or Cheltenham if desired.
The scheme is effectively funded by the District Councils, with the support of
nearly £500,000 of funding from the County Council, and will operate initially for a
three year period (2006-09). The policy will be reviewed at the end of the three
year period.
In addition, on the Project Express routes within Worcester, free travel for under
19 year olds has been introduced as a pilot. This will make it easier for younger
people to travel within the city to access workplaces, further education, and for
leisure purposes, and has contributed to the rise in ridership of these services.
This pilot will be reviewed at an earlier date than the wider concessionary travel
scheme.
Policy ITP9: Work with District Councils through the Joint Members
Integrated Passenger Transport Forum to establish and maintain a
Countywide concessionary travel scheme that gives equal journey
opportunities to all eligible residents irrespective of their geographic
location within Worcestershire.
4.2.6.9 Taxis
Taxis have a vital role to play in the provision of public transport services across
the County, and it is anticipated that this will strengthen further through the
implementation of the Project Express model of passenger transport service
provision. This is based upon the provision of local feeder networks using taxibuses
to support the main network of bus services across the County.
This approach will require joint working with the District Councils, who are the
licensing authorities for taxi operations, to ensure that a consistent approach to
licensing is carried out across the County, and that this permits the development
of innovative solutions to local accessibility problems. Currently, in some Districts
taxi-bus operations would not be possible due to the licensing regulations that
apply. This issue is being taken forward through the Joint Worcestershire
Integrated Passenger Transport Forum.
The County Council, through its Road Safety team, provides driver training for
taxi drivers throughout Worcestershire, as well as providing this service to other
authorities. This ensures that a consistent standard of safety is set and that
people using a taxi within Worcestershire can be assured that the driver is trained
to a minimum standard.
94

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
At present taxis are only allowed to use a limited number of bus lanes within
Redditch, where such use was demonstrated to have a major benefit for
passengers through ensuring shorter journeys. Use of other existing bus lanes,
and any new facilities that are introduced, will be considered on a case by case
basis.
The provision of taxi stances is reviewed regularly by the County Council, as
Highway Authority, in partnership with the District Councils, as licensing authority.
The Project Express approach will require the formation of local interchange
points between the main bus service network and the local taxi-buses, and this
includes the provision of suitable facilities.
In summary, the role of the taxi in the passenger transport system within
Worcestershire is likely to become increasingly important during the LTP2 period
as a result of the Project Express proposals.
Policy IPT10: Work with other partners and taxi operators to ensure that
taxis play a full role in the delivery of the Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy.
4.2.6.10 Coaches
Coach transport contributes to the provision of passenger transport facilities
within Worcestershire in two ways. The first is by bringing visitors to the County
on day trips or on holiday, and whilst these services are not available to the wider
travelling public, such visitors do contribute to the local economy.
The second contribution is the national express coach services that serve the
County. These are largely focussed on the Trunk Road network and do not
generally call into city or town centres.
Visitor Coaches
Many visitors to Worcestershire’s main visitor attractions arrive by coach, with
Worcester Royal Porcelain generating 750 coach trips (carrying 25,178 people)
during 2001 (Source:
Worcester Coach
Parking Study: 2002).
Therefore, it is
important that suitable
facilities are available
for coaches in the form
of drop off / pick up
points, and coach
parking facilities.
The greatest pressure
is in Worcester where,
in addition to
Worcester Royal
Porcelain, the
Cathedral attracts
coach parties and has no specific coach parking facilities. Elsewhere in the
95

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
County, attractions that have visitors arriving by coach, such as the West
Midlands Safari Park, generally have adequate facilities available.
Therefore, consideration will be given in the further development of Worcester’s
Project Express strategy to the provision of coach parking facilities at proposed
Park and Ride sites. In addition, proposals to re-develop the riverside area of
Worcester should give due consideration to the inclusion of suitable coach
parking facilities where possible.
National Coach Services
Scheduled express coach services such as those operated by National Express
also provide an attractive long-distance alternative to rail travel for people on
limited incomes, and the demand for such travel can be expected to grow within
Worcester itself with the expansion of the University College over the LTP2
period, which will result in more students travelling to / from the city. The existing
small scale Coachway facility is located next to M5 Junction 6 at Warndon
Business Park. This facility takes the form of a simple bus stop, and there are no
passenger facilities and poor interchange with local bus services. The coach
operators, which are operating services along the M5, do not wish to incur the
time penalty involved in travelling into Worcester city centre.
Therefore, there is a need to improve the interchange between scheduled
express coach and local bus services and opportunities to do so as part of the
Project Express initiative within Worcester will be explored and taken where
practical. The feasibility of a combined express coach and Park and Ride facility
is being actively considered as part of the proposed Rugby Club Park and Ride
site next to Junction 6, and it is intended that this facility could act as a hub for
improved Express Coach services serving Worcester, especially with the likely
growth in the student travel market resulting from the University expansion.
Other opportunities to improve interchange between coach and local bus services
may exist as part of the Evesham High Street enhancement, as National Express
services using the A46 (T) route currently stop within the town.
Policy IPT11: Work with operators to improve the interchange between
express coach and local bus services within the County, especially in
Worcester where demand for coach travel can be expected to increase over
the LTP2 period, and to improve the range of express coach services
serving Worcester.
96

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.7 Rail Strategy
Overview
Rail has become an increasingly important mode of travel within Worcestershire
over the past decade, as is indicated in the table below which shows demand for
rail travel between 1994 and 2005:
Worcestershire Station Usage – Annual journeys 1994 – 2002
Station 1994 2005 Change (%)
Alvechurch 40,196 107,844 168%
Barnt Green 95,764 156,089 63%
Blakedown 23,894 45,802 92%
Bromsgrove 61,993 309,634 400%
Droitwich Spa 263,376 318,174 21%
Evesham 132,158 238,895 81%
Great Malvern 281,511 401,937 43%
Hagley 154,872 233,857 51%
Hartlebury 8,179 4,707 -42%
Honeybourne 8,666 11,005 27%
Kidderminster 645,517 1,038,129 61%
Malvern Link 146,185 211,079 44%
Pershore 31,060 58,754 89%
Redditch 331,946 756,275 128%
Worcester stations 1,245,040 1,914,590 54%
Wythall 32,380 43,714 35%
TOTAL 3,502,637 5,850,485 67%
The two Worcester stations are the busiest within the County with passenger
numbers approaching 2 million a year. Around three-quarters of these use the
more central station, at Foregate Street, which is better served by trains to / from
Birmingham. Shrub Hill is less well used even though it has some car parking
provision as it is less central, and is predominantly served by trains to London
and the South-west.
Kidderminster is the second busiest station, carrying just over a million
passengers a year, with significant growth having been recorded over the 11
years. This increase can be attributed to the continual improvement of services
from Kidderminster to Birmingham operated by Central Trains and the
introduction of peak time train services to London Marylebone by Chiltern
Railways during 2002.
It is also notable that Kidderminster (40) and the Worcester stations (54)
generate more passengers per train than other comparable non – metropolitan
stations within the West Midlands region.
97

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Elsewhere in the County, significant growth has been recorded at stations on the
Redditch – Birmingham Cross – City line and on the Cotswold Line (Worcester –
London).
Although Bromsgrove Station has limited passenger facilities, usage has grown
at a higher rate than any other station within Worcestershire over the past
decade. With new housing and employment sites being developed within walking
distance of the station, this increasing usage can be expected to continue over
the LTP2 period.
Worcestershire’s rail network is shown in the map below, and includes the
Birmingham – Bristol main line, which bypasses Worcester to the east, the
Hereford to London line, which runs through Malvern, Worcester and Evesham
and the local rail network connecting Worcestershire with Birmingham.
98

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.7.1 Rail Industry Structure
Following the 2005 Railways Act responsibility for the overall management of the
rail industry has now passed from the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), which has
been dissolved, to the Department for Transport (DfT).
Recent work undertaken by the SRA and being continued by the DfT will be
crucial to the development of the rail network within Worcestershire and includes:
• Route Utilisation Strategies – essentially the ten year investment plan for the
rail network, published during 2005.
• Regional Planning Assessment – effectively the long term planning document
looking at the 2011 – 2031 period and identifying key land use issues that will
influence the long term development of the rail network.
• Railways for All – a consultation document published by the SRA outlining
actions to improve accessibility and staffing levels at stations across the
country.
There are a number of constraints on the rail network in Worcestershire that
significantly restrict the potential for increasing commuting by rail. These include:
• The lack of direct access to the Birmingham – Bristol main line
• The bottleneck between Worcester and Droitwich and the poor track layout
between Worcester Shrub Hill and Foregate Street, which adversely affect
service reliability
• Limited capacity at Bromsgrove station
• Lengths of single-track railway on the Hereford to London line, which
adversely affects rail service reliability.
These constraints especially the length of single track on key sections of the
network and the inadequate signalling result in reliability problems with Central
Trains having one of the worst reliability records for punctuality, only 70.9% of
trains arriving within 5 minutes of their scheduled time for period 8 (16 th October –
12 th November 2005) compared to the national score of 79.6%. One of the
impacts of this within Worcestershire is that, due to late running, services
operating on the Worcester to Hereford line are often turned short of their
destination.
The capacity constraints on the network also mean that in the short term it will be
difficult to operate additional peak time trains on the Worcestershire routes into
the conurbation. Therefore it is important that alternative ways of providing
additional passenger capacity are explored and the most likely option is to
lengthen trains operating on these routes. This approach would require the
lengthening of short platforms at stations such as Bromsgrove and this is a
priority within LTP2.
The National Rail Passenger Survey carried out by the Rail Passengers Council
(RPC) in Autumn 2005 contained the following general points relating to
Worcestershire:
99

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Satisfaction with facilities and services at Worcestershire stations is low.
• Satisfaction with connections with other forms of public transport is low.
• Satisfaction with car parking facilities at Worcestershire stations is low
(although higher than the national average).
• Overall satisfaction with train services is very low.
These results emphasise the need for investment in the rail network within
Worcestershire.
Over the LTP2 period there will be major changes to the management of the rail
network within Worcestershire as summarised on the next page and therefore the
major objective regarding rail is:
Policy RAIL1: To ensure that the rail network is in a fit state to play a full
role in the implementation of a sustainable transport strategy for
Worcestershire.
4.2.7.2 Route Utilisation Strategies
The SRA produced the Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS), which set out the
medium term management of the railways, focusing on those parts of the rail
network that are particularly congested. Worcestershire’s rail network is covered
by two RUS’s:
• Greater Western RUS – includes the Malverns – Worcester – London railway
and the network linking Worcester to Gloucester and the south – west.
• West Midlands RUS – this covers the rail network connecting Worcestershire
to the West Midlands conurbation. The RUS recognises the potential case for
a Worcester Parkway station, but appears to link this to the possible closure
of Shrub Hill station.
These strategies will form the framework for the specification of franchises within
the areas the cover, and therefore of particular importance is the West Midlands
RUS, as this will guide the specification of the new West Midlands franchise.
4.2.7.3 Regional Planning Assessment
Work on the Regional Planning Assessment (RPA) for the West Midlands was
started by the SRA, but will now be taken forward by the Department for
Transport (DfT) Rail Division, which has responsibility for forward planning and
policy development. It is anticipated that this work will be carried forward during
the early years of the LTP2 period, given the time period for consideration of
2011-21.
Within Worcestershire, it is apparent that longer-term demand for rail travel could
be influenced by Worcester’s future development as a sub-regional focii, with
significant housing and employment growth added to the University expansion,
whilst the Central Technology Belt through the County identifies nodes for
employment growth clustered on settlements served by the Birmingham –
100

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Worcester – Malvern rail corridor (Longbridge, Bromsgrove, Droitwich, Worcester
and Malvern). The rail network would be extremely well placed to meet the extra
travel demands placed by these employment nodes, but significant infrastructure
problems would need to be overcome to ensure the provision of sufficient
capacity.
The County Council will seek to ensure that these factors are fully taken into
account when DfT Rail undertakes the RPA work.
4.2.7.4 Franchise Changes
The franchises that cover rail services within Worcestershire have been
restructured and this means the following changes:
• Greater Western – a merger between the previous Great Western, Great
Western Link and Wessex Trains franchises this franchise has been awarded
to First and will begin on 1 st April 2006. Services linking the Malverns and
Worcester with London via the Cotswold Line will be included in this
franchise, along with services linking Worcester with the south – west. Whilst
Worcestershire forms the northern boundary of this franchise area, the
County Council will aim to ensure that the opportunity is taken to secure
improvements to rail services linking the county with London and the south –
west, including securing a commitment to serve the proposed Worcester
Parkway station.
• Central Trains – this franchise effectively covers local services connecting
the County to the West Midlands conurbation. The DfT is ending this
franchise with services in Worcestershire being distributed to the Cross
Country franchise (held by Virgin Trains) and a new West Midlands TOC,
although there is an option for services from Worcestershire to Birmingham
Snow Hill to be taken on by Chiltern Railways if their bid offers the best value
for money. Under that scenario the West Midlands TOC would only operate
the Redditch to Birmingham New Street service in Worcestershire. The new
franchises will begin during Autumn 2007.
• Cross Country – the right to operate these services is currently held by
Virgin Trains but the DfT will let a new franchise for these services that will
also begin during Autumn 2007. This new franchise will include the services
from Birmingham New Street to Cardiff Central or Hereford that are currently
part of the Central Trains franchise. Although Cross Country have always
operated through Worcestershire their services have not previously stopped
in the County and the County Council will seek to ensure that the
opportunities this change brings will be taken full advantage of.
• Chiltern Trains – Chiltern Trains operate peak period services between
Kidderminster and London Marylebone as part of their existing franchise. As
noted above, Chiltern’s operations within Worcestershire could be extended
through the re-franchising of current Central Trains services in 2007.
With the exception of the Greater Western franchise, which formally commenced
at the very start of the LTP2 period (April 2006), the provision of rail services in
the County will be in a state of flux over the first two years of LTP2. This means
that the real opportunities to improve rail services within the County may not be
available until the latter part of the LTP2 period (2008 onwards).
101

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
In 2006/07, the Councils efforts will be focussed on the identification of
Worcestershire’s needs with respect to the new franchises, influencing the
franchise specification through liaison with DfT Rail, Network Rail and
prospective bidders for those franchises, and finally working with the ultimately
successful bidders to secure the service patterns which best meet the Counties’
needs. Much of this work will be carried out through the Worcestershire Rail
Forum, which will bring together industry representatives from all sectors of the
rail industry alongside passenger groups and Worcestershire Partnership
representatives to identify the needs of the County.
Policy RAIL2: Ensure that train operating companies meet the needs of
Worcestershire travellers when planning and delivering rail services, and
seek to influence the new West Midlands and Cross Country franchises to
provide better rail services within Worcestershire.
4.2.7.5 Stations
Worcestershire Parkway
The only major new station proposal for the County is the Worcestershire
Parkway scheme and it is intended that this will be constructed during the LTP2
period to support the overall Worcester City Transport Package (see Policy
WOR3).
This will be readily accessible from the strategic highway network (the M5
motorway at Junction 7), serving a wide catchment area in South Worcestershire
covering around 300,000 people. As noted in Chapter 3, the scheme is identified
within the Regional Spatial Strategy as a major element of the Strategic Park and
Ride strategy for the West Midlands, and is Worcestershire single transport
scheme specifically identified within RSS.
102

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Since 2002, three feasibility studies have been completed for this project, each
considering the business case for the scheme in slightly greater detail than the
last one. These studies are:
• Halcrow Study, 2002 – study commissioned by Worcestershire County
Council to investigate basic business case for the station. Concluded that the
station would bring overall benefits to the rail network, but identified a large
number of issues requiring further analysis.
• Atkins Study, 2004 – study commissioned by the Strategic Rail Authority to
review the feasibility of a Gloucestershire Parkway and a Worcester Parkway.
Concluded that a Gloucestershire Parkway has a slightly better business
case, and that there are timetabling difficulties about providing two additional
stops for existing train services between Birmingham and Bristol. Confirmed
that the siting of the station at the intersection of the Worcester – London and
Birmingham – Bristol railways made the best business sense due to the
ability to provide interchange between services. Ruled out an alternative site
at Spetchley.
• Laing Rail Study, 2006 – study commissioned by Worcestershire County
Council to further develop the conclusions of the Atkins Study. Due for
completion in March 2006.
A more detailed summary of these studies is given in the supporting text to Policy
WOR3. However, there is widespread support, expressed through the LTP2
consultation, for the construction of the Parkway proposal, and the County
Council will continue to press for its inclusion in the relevant plans within the rail
industry.
Policy RAIL3: To attain direct access to national rail services through the
construction of a Parkway station at the intersection of the Worcester –
London and Birmingham – Bristol railway lines.
Other New Stations
In the first LTP, a wide range of other new stations were identified within
Worcestershire, and some proposals have been identified by Parish Councils
through the preparation of Parish Plans (such as a station serving Leigh Sinton
and Bransford to the south-west of Worcester, and one at Eckington to the
south). It is recognised that there is no prospect of any other new stations being
constructed during the LTP2 period.
However, with regard to the longer-term, then opportunities for new stations,
possibly associated with new development, could be considered as part of the
discussions on the development of the RPA.
103

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.7.6 Station Improvements
Existing passenger facilities at most Worcestershire stations are generally poor,
as recognised by the RPC survey in 2005, and a wide-scale programme of
station refurbishment and enhancement is required. The County Council will work
with the rail industry, particularly Network Rail and the new franchisees operating
train services within the County, to identify and implement improvements at
stations. Particular areas of concern are lack of booking office facilities at some
busy stations such as Bromsgrove, and a lack of step-free access to station
facilities including platforms, which can result in significant inconvenience to
disabled passengers.
Limited car parking facilities constrain the ability of stations to act as park and
ride facilities for trips within Worcestershire and to/from the West Midlands
conurbation. At Wythall, which is a Centro supported station, for example there is
potential to develop the station to include a park and ride site that could relieve
congestion into south Birmingham and Stratford upon Avon. This may be
examined as part of the Regional Spatial Strategy Review of the Strategic Park
and Ride policy for the West Midlands.
The RPC surveys shows some concern about aspects of personal security at
some of the stations in the County, with some suffering from poor lighting whilst
others do not have closed circuit television and the Council will work with the rail
industry to secure relevant improvements at all stations.
The inclusion of Droitwich Spa and Kidderminster stations within the Railways
for All consultation, indicating the potential for investment to make these stations
fully accessible for disabled people, is welcomed. However, other well used
stations within Worcestershire, such as Bromsgrove, Evesham and Worcester
Foregate Street, were not included in the DfT strategy and there was no clear
focus on what the future situation might be in the longer term.
Where possible, the County Council will support proposals to improve
accessibility for all sectors of the community at all stations within the County, and
will seek to support the rail industry in achieving compliance with the
requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.
104

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
In terms of prioritising improvements, the County Council will generally seek to
ensure that busier stations are brought up to a higher standard at the earliest
possible opportunities, and to link improvements with neighbouring developments
as far as possible. Particular opportunities and early priorities are considered to
exist at the following stations:
• Bromsgrove – general package of improvements required (Policy BROM2)
• Worcester Foregate Street - major enhancement required as this station will
form the gateway to Worcester’s new University campus and Library complex,
as well as the city centre as a whole.
• Malvern Link – opportunity to provide enhanced park and ride facilities and
better links with Malvern – Worcester bus services.
• Evesham – proposed new path to improve disabled access is under design
for possible delivery in 2006/07
• Kidderminster – general enhancement required to bus / rail interchange and
to provide step-free access. Improved walk / cycle link between station and
town centre being developed for possible implementation in 2006/07.
This is not an exhaustive list by any means, and other schemes will be
considered when opportunities exist. It is clear that LTP2 will not be able to fund
these improvements solely, however, and that funding from the rail industry as
well as other sources, such as Districts or developers, will be required to deliver
these much-needed improvements.
Policy RAIL4: To work with the rail industry to upgrade all stations to make
them easier, safer and more attractive for people to use by implementing a
package of measures including additional car parking, platform
lengthening, passenger facilities such as waiting room/booking office and
disabled access.
Policy RAIL5: To improve general accessibility to all stations within the
County and work towards achieving full compliance with the DDA at all
facilities.
105

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.7.7 Infrastructure improvements
There are a number of long standing proposals to upgrade rail infrastructure
within the Worcestershire area which, if implemented would potentially improve
the capacity and reliability of the rail network. The County Council wishes to work
with rail industry partners to identify opportunities to progress these works
through the franchising, RUS and RPA processes. These include:
• Improvements to track layout between Worcester Foregate Street and Shrub
Hill – programmed for 2006. This will improve the flexibility of service
connections between these stations.
• Signalling improvements on Worcester – Droitwich section - The inadequate
signalling on this line means that only one train in each direction can be
operating at any time. This has a significant impact upon service reliability if a
single train is running late. Improvements to the signalling on this section of
line are a priority for the County, but are currently programmed for as late as
2012 within rail industry plans (West Midlands RUS).
• Cotswold Line – reliability of services on the Cotswold Line can be affected by
the inadequate signalling, as well as the significant length of single track
sections, which restrict the number of locations at which trains can pass.
Studies have identified a range of improvements, including double tracking
the Norton Junction to Pershore section of line. Although there was no
commitment in the Greater Western franchise award to progress this work it is
still considered that signalling improvements and track improvements should
be progressed as a priority to increase capacity on this line.
• Worcester – Malverns – Hereford - This line is restricted by the length of
single track sections, which have a major impact on reliability of services.
Proposals to upgrade this line should be included within the long term plans of
the rail industry and franchise bidders will be pressed to contribute towards
such improvements.
• Barnt Green – Redditch - The potential for a passing loop on the Barnt Green
to Redditch section of the line should be explored to permit the provision of an
increased frequency of service on the Cross City line to Redditch.
• Stratford upon Avon – Cheltenham line - Reopening of this disused line along
it’s full length would provide a strategic route bypassing the existing
Birmingham – Bristol main line, which has existing capacity problems. This
route could potentially be specifically used to divert freight traffic off the main
line, permitting it to avoid the Lickey Incline.
• Signalling improvements between Stourbridge and Hartlebury - offers an
opportunity to improve train service frequency and improve the reliability of
train services in that area.
The County Council will work with partners on the Worcestershire Rail Forum to
make the case for increased investment in the rail network within the County to in
turn help secure improvements to rail service reliability.
Policy RAIL6: Work with rail industry partners to identify and implement
infrastructure improvements to increase the capacity of the rail network
and reliability of services.
106

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.7.8 Cross-Boundary Schemes
There are also rail schemes under development in surrounding authorities that
could assist in meeting travel needs for Worcestershire. These include the
following pair of schemes being promoted in the West Midlands Local Transport
Plan that could bring benefits to residents in North Worcestershire.
• Frankley branch extension - this scheme allows the extension of the
Birmingham Cross City line from Longbridge to Frankley. Rail services will
use the MG Rover freight spur sidings and disused alignment between
Longbridge and Frankley centre. Progression is subject to reinstatement of
the Rail Passenger Partnership fund or an appropriate alternative funding
source.
• People living in the peripheral Frankley area will have access to a direct rail
link to Birmingham city centre and other key facilities (e.g. Queen Elizabeth
Hospital). The scheme proposes a realistic alternative to the congested A38
Bristol Road
• Longbridge Park & Ride - this scheme is for a 980 space multi – storey car
park next to Longbridge station, enabling motorists from Worcestershire to
switch to rail for journeys into central Birmingham. Accessibility into central
Birmingham city will be improved with an attractive alternative to the car. The
scheme will also provide for disabled drivers, cyclists and motorcyclists. The
scheme will also assist in reducing congestion along the Birmingham –
Worcestershire high technology corridor.
The County Council will also continue to play a full role in the Regional Rail
Forum, and support regional colleagues in consistent efforts to secure
improvements to the rail network as a whole. In this respect, one of the main
projects to be supported is the proposed re-development of New Street station in
Birmingham, where many Worcestershire journeys are made, as the current
conditions for the travelling public are patently poor, and there is a clear need for
improved passenger facilities on both safety and environmental grounds. The
Council will therefore support this scheme as one which will bring benefits to
Worcestershire travellers.
Policy RAIL7: To recognise our regional role by providing support to
neighbouring authorities in their development of rail schemes where these
will clearly have benefits for Worcestershire.
107

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.8 Economic Strategy Support
Overview
The County Council will ensure that the transport implications of major
development proposals that are developed within Worcestershire are fully
assessed and that appropriate transport strategies are put in place for such
developments to ensure that the sites are accessible to all sectors of the
community. This will be done through a variety of means, depending on the
size and scale of the development proposal. Main approaches are:
• Strategic Transportation Studies – this will be undertaken for the largest
developments, or for regional or sub-regional sites. Examples are to
investigate the implications of Worcester’s sub-regional role, the impact of the
British Sugar site in Kidderminster, or the re-development of the Longbridge
Works. These studies will almost always be multi-agency and wide-ranging,
and the outcome will be a major transportation strategy that could significantly
alter the LTP2 strategy.
• District Transportation Studies – these will generally be undertaken with
District Councils as part of the process for the review of Local Plans / Local
Development Frameworks. The outcome is likely to be a smaller scale
transport strategy that would generally fit with the LTP2 Strategy without
significant changes.
• Development Sites – these will generally be developer-led, and will involve
the preparation of a Transportation Assessment, supported by an
Accessibility Appraisal and Travel Plan. The outcome will be a site specific
transport strategy that would generally be developer funded. This would need
to comply with the LTP2 strategy, and may involve funding for LTP2 schemes
from the developer.
Policy ECON1: Support the implementation of transport strategies that will
assist the sustainable development of key economic development sites
identified within the Worcestershire Economic Strategy.
4.2.8.1 Market Towns Transportation Initiative
Worcestershire contains several market towns that have populations between
2,000 and 20,000, and which provide a wide range of facilities for a wider rural
community. These towns are the focus for their rural hinterland, and the
accessibility strategy has highlighted that accessibility to the facilities provided by
the market towns is a significant issue. Some market towns also have a variety
of problems relating to safety, environment, air quality, and asset management
which the LTP2 strategy can help to resolve.
Specific opportunities to secure improvements in market towns are identified
within the Area Strategies that follow later in this strategy. However, the four
priorities for action within the LTP2 period are as follows:
• Evesham – High Street enhancement proposals have been developed
following an extensive consultation process. These are largely based upon
108

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
securing an environmental improvement in the town centre. The scheme is
programmed for completion in 2008/09.
• Stourport-on-Severn – the main focus is to reduce the impact of traffic
congestion on the town’s economy and environment. Whilst the solution of a
Relief Road cannot be funded during the LTP2 period, small traffic
management measures could be possible using pump-prime funding secured
through the Local Area Agreement. If this approach is successful, the initial
measures could be implemented during 2006/07.
• Bewdley – the main focus is on removing the air quality problems within a
small part of the town centre, and funding is allocated within LTP2 to
implement a scheme in 2007/08.
• Pershore – the objective is to improve pedestrian safety within the High
Street, and to secure associated environmental improvements. The scheme
should be implemented by 2007/08.
Improvements in other market towns will also be progressed during the LTP2
period where opportunities allow, but there is no specific allocation of LTP2
funding to permit schemes to proceed. Therefore, the initial reliance will be upon
developer or other third party funding to secure any improvements.
Policy ECON2: To support the vitality of market towns within
Worcestershire through the implementation of transport measures to
provide a safer and pleasanter town centre environment.
4.2.8.2 Tourism
The major opportunities relating to tourism were outlined in Chapter 3, and it is
clear that the implementation of the LTP2 strategy will play a major role in
securing the benefits for Worcestershire of growing the visitor economy. Many
schemes, such as those within the Market Towns referred to above, will help
secure a pleasanter environment for residents and visitors alike.
Some opportunities, such as that in Worcester allied to the proposed riverside
park, will only be fully maximised with the implementation of a wider transport
strategy to remove traffic from the city centre. This would provide the conditions
for a car-free environment around Worcester Cathedral as well as the University
campus, but this will require major investment in transport infrastructure, and is
unlikely during the LTP2 period.
However, the LTP2 strategy will seek to take opportunities to support
Worcestershire’s Visitor Destination Strategy through the provision of better local
environments, and through the provision of appropriate infrastructure help
worcestershire secure the maximum benefit from the London 2012 Olympic
Games.
Policy ECON3: To support the promotion of Worcestershire as a tourism
destination through relevant investment in transport measures to improve
accessibility to key visitor destinations.
109

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.9 Sustainable Travel Initiatives
Sustainable travel, as a term, covers a wide range of activity within the LTP2
strategy. This specific section of the strategy focuses on walking and cycling as
modes of transport. These modes are the ones that are available to virtually
everyone, and are realistic options for the majority of journeys made. In
particular, they are those modes suitable for younger people, and therefore it is
critical to make a positive impression of making journeys on foot or by bike, as
poor conditions for such journeys could deter people from continuing to walk or
cycle in future life.
4.2.9.1 Walking Schemes
Overview
Virtually all journeys involve an element of walking at some stage, and therefore it
is crucial that good facilities are provided that permit people to walk on the routes
most convenient to them in safety. Good footways and footpaths that are well lit,
wide and linked to safe crossing points of the road network are essential to
encourage people to make local trips predominantly on foot.
Research within Worcester has shown that 20% of trips are less than 1 kilometre
in length, and these could easily be made on foot. However, the same research
shows that 7% of car journeys are less than 1 kilometre in length, thus indicating
that there are many journeys that could easily be made on foot rather than by car.
Infrastructure
Whilst comprehensive footway and footpath networks do generally exist within
urban areas, there remain gaps in these networks, and pedestrian crossings are
not always located on pedestrian desire lines. Therefore, there is a need for
further investment in improved facilities for pedestrians within urban areas.
There has not been a comprehensive review of the facilities available on the
walking network, or network-wide analysis to identify gaps in provision. Typically,
any such gaps are identified on an ad-hoc basis by requests received from the
public. The only specific assessment of a network will tend to come through a
School Travel Plan or when a development proposal is being scrutinised. In
these situations, analysis of the walking routes within the catchment of the school
/ development will take place to identify any specific improvements that could be
funded through the STP, or by the developer.
However, through the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town project, a
comprehensive review of Worcester’s walking network is being undertaken.
Whilst the outcome of this review, to be completed in Spring 2006, will only apply
to Worcester, the experience of this approach could be applied to other parts of
the County. In particular, the results might permit the first full analysis of the level
of investment required to upgrade the walking network to a suitable standard to
promote walking as a mainstream mode of transport, and this could provide a
model that could be applied to the other towns across Worcestershire, as well as
forming the basis for future funding bids.
110

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
With regard to Asset Management, the County Council is seeking to invest
significantly in the improvement of those footways identified as being the busiest.
During 2004/05, this was a factor in the re-furbishment of Worcester High Street,
and whilst resources aren’t currently available for a £1+ million scheme such as
that, the County Council is investing additional funds in the maintenance of Class
1 and 2 footways, which tend to be in town centre locations. This is a priority
area within the 2006/07 budget.
In rural areas, provision for pedestrians is often patchier, and there is a need for
investment to ensure that residents within communities can access local facilities
safely on foot. The Rights of Way Improvement Plan (see later) is likely to
identify opportunities for improvements in rural areas that will benefit both users
of the Rights of Way network and people seeking to walk safely within their
communities. The County Walking Officer will work closely with the Rights of Way
(ROW) team to identify where the ROW network could provide good pedestrian
access to key facilities.
Policy WALK1: Implement a Countywide programme of improvements to
the pedestrian network.
Promotion
Dissemination of information on walking routes to key services and the health
benefits of regular walking is a significant part of the role of the county walking
officer. Currently approval is being sought to include average walking times on
fingerpost signs for pedestrian routes rather than the distances as it is thought
this is more meaningful and encouraging to potential walkers. Maps showing
walking routes will be available for all the towns in the county within the LTP2
period.
The county walking officer will give particular attention to the promotion of walking
to shopping and leisure facilities where there is a well defined destination and
lesser time and clothing constraints compared with work journeys.
Again, the success of marketing techniques applied within the Worcester
Sustainable Travel Town project to promote walking will be assessed and the
successful measures applied elsewhere in the County.
Policy WALK2: Encourage people to make local journeys on foot by
providing good quality information on walking routes through the
publication of walk / cycle / public transport maps for all areas of the
County.
Facilities for the Mobility Impaired
Attention will be given to improving the pedestrian network to meet the
requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act and provide convenient and safe
access to key services for all residents.
Policy WALK3: Improve pedestrian facilities to enable isolated and/or more
vulnerable people safe and convenient access to essential services.
111

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.9.2 Cycling Schemes
At present relatively few journeys within Worcestershire are made by cycle,
although where investment has been made in improved cycle facilities then
cycling has increased in importance. Within Worcester city, for example, 3% of
journeys are made by cycle, but 56% of journeys are less than 5 kilometres in
length, this being the standard length of journey that is easily cycled.
There is obviously major potential to increase the amount of cycling within
Worcestershire’s main urban areas, with cycle networks already being well
established within Worcester in particular. One of the main objectives within
LTP2 will be to fill the gaps in these networks at the earliest possible opportunity,
working alongside projects such as the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town
partnership and through Cycle Forums in Worcester and Wyre Forest.
Infrastructure
The map below shows the existing cycle network within the County, and the
proposed routes that have been identified as desirable. Inter-urban links exist
between Worcester and Pershore / Droitwich, and Redditch and Bromsgrove, but
it can be seen that significant additional links are required across the County.
Funding to deliver these additional links will be limited during the LTP2 period.
However, the County Council will seek to maximise the levels of third party
funding secured to assist with the delivery of the complete cycle network. By
identifying the wider network, opportunities to secure developer funding towards
its development will be easier to take, by making the links between a
development and the network clearer to identify. In Malvern, for example,
significant developer contribution towards the provision of cycle routes in the
Malvern Link area have been secured through the DERA North site (a total of
package of £800,000 covering walking, cycle and traffic management measures).
Policy CYC1: Implement a countywide programme of improvements to the
cycle network.
112

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
113

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Inter-urban Routes
In addition, work will continue on the development of inter-urban cycle routes in
partnership with SUSTRANS and District Councils. During LTP1, work has
progressed on the delivery of the National Cycle Network through the County with
investment in routes such as Pershore to Worcester, and this will again progress
during the LTP2 period. The table below gives an indication of existing routes
completed during the first LTP period and the planned work for this second LTP
period and beyond.
Strategic Cycle Route Development within Worcestershire
Cycle Route Existing sections Planned Sections
NCN National Route 5 Redditch to Bromsgrove to
(West Midlands Cycle Catshill to Rubery to
Route
Birmingham
NCN National Route 41
Tewkesbury to Evesham
NCN National Route 45
(Severn Valley Cycleway)
NCN National Route 46
NCN National Route 54
NCN Regional Route 46
(Future Regional Route
44)
NCN Regional Route 49
NCN Regional Route 55
Worcester to Droitwich
and Bewdley to Alveley
(Shrops)
Worcester (Pitchcroft) to
Droitwich
Pershore to Worcester
(South Quay)
Redditch to Kings Norton
to Stratford
Tewkesbury to Worcester
and Droitwich to Stourport
to Bewdley
Worcester to Great
Malvern to Hereford
Stourport to Kidderminster
to Stourbridge and Dudley
Worcester (South Quay) to
Worcester (Pitchcroft)
Bewdley to Kidderminster
(via Burlish Top)
Additionally, links and spurs to the National Cycle Network and other separate
routes to workplaces, schools, shops and leisure attractions are also being
developed.
Policy CYC2: Work with SUSTRANS to further develop an inter-urban
network of cycle routes providing strategic links across the County
including the National Cycle Network.
Cycle Parking and Other Facilities
A further focus will be on improving cycle facilities at destinations, such as
workplaces, schools, transport interchanges, and town / city centres. In
particular, the provision of secure cycle parking will be a major element of
Employer and School Travel Plans. Worcestershire County Council is currently
providing grants in the form of free Sheffield cycle stands to employers who are
interested in promoting cycling to their premises for employees, customers,
clients etc. Companies successful in obtaining stands agree to the installation,
maintenance and monitoring of usage.
114

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Policy CYC3: Provide secure cycle parking facilities at key destinations
such as town centres and retail parks, transport interchanges, and
workplaces / schools.
Promotion
A significant aspect of the County Cycling Officer’s role is the dissemination of
information relating to cycling. This includes the production and distribution of
cycle maps (coverage of all towns in the county to be available during this LTP2
period) and the maintenance of the County Council’s cycling website that
includes:-
• Dates and minutes of cycle forum meetings
• Route information
• County Council contacts reporting maintenance problems, requesting cycle
training and making suggestions for improvement
• Details for cycle retailers and cycle clubs
• Educational information on the health and environmental benefits of cycling
During this LTP2 period the county cycling officer aims to set up cycle training
opportunities for all ages of cyclist to supplement the current training offered for
school children through the Road Safety team. This recognises that it is crucial
to ensure that younger children are trained properly how to ride a bike, and in
particularly to ensure that they are capable of riding safely on the road.
However, when seeking to encourage older people to start cycling for local
journeys (for example to work), the fear of riding on the road is often a major
barrier, as highlighted by the surveys undertaken for Worcester Sustainable
Travel Town. Adult cycle training, and schemes such as the Cycle Buddy
scheme where an experienced rider will accompany a less experienced rider until
they get their confidence, are therefore an important element of increasing the
numbers of people cycling within Worcestershire.
Policy CYC4: Encourage people to make local journeys by bike by
providing good quality information on cycling routes through the
publication of walk / cycle / public transport maps for all areas of the
County.
4.2.9.3 Quiet Lanes
In 2004/05, a pilot Quiet Lanes project was completed based on the village of
Inkberrow. The process of introducing the scheme, which was based on a
number of popular walking routes radiating from the village, proved to be a
protracted one, involving an extensive consultation process with the local
community. The usage of the Quiet Lanes will be monitored, and further
schemes will be introduced only where they are identified as meeting a wider
community need and where they have strong local community support.
In particular, where the introduction of a Quiet Lane style treatment on a minor
road would benefit accessibility to local facilities for residents, or where it would
complement the implementation of measures identified through the Rights of Way
115

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Improvement Plan then these could be supported through the LTP2. This could
cover situations where, for example, a short length of country lane provides a link
between two rights of way, and a Quiet Lane scheme would improve safety for
people moving between those rights of way.
Policy QL1: Quiet Lane schemes will only be considered where they have
firm community support and where they will add value to other strategy
areas within LTP2
116

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.9.4 Rights Of Way Improvement Plan
Overview
All Highway Authorities have a statutory duty to prepare a Rights of Way
Improvement Plan (ROWIP) by November 2007, and work is underway on the
development of Worcestershire’s ROWIP. A public consultation was carried out
during 2005. Full integration with LTP2 is expected by 2010, although the
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) requires a progress
report on the ROWIP preparation process to be included in the LTP2 submission
in March 2006.
What is the ROWIP?
The ROWIP is a strategic assessment of the adequacy of the rights of way
network to meet current and future need (for walking, cycling and riding for
recreational or utilitarian purposes). It will also provide strategic aims and
objectives for the development and management of the network in the future.
Although the ROWIP is focused on public rights of way, it is also concerned with
the adequacy of other tracts of land that the public might use to complete their
walk, cycle or ride (e.g. canal towpaths, quiet lanes or public open space) insofar
as those tracts of land contribute to a wider network of routes available for
walking, cycling or riding and driving.
The ROWIP and LTP process complement each other through a number of
common objectives as the ROW network provides footpath, cycleway and
bridleway access to key local services as well as for recreational purposes.
Details of the current rights of way network are shown below:
Parish PROW Length (km) Number of Paths
Footpath 3,872.2 13,556
Bridleway 683 2,386
Byway 4.28 13
TOTAL 4,559 15,955
It can be seen that the PROW network is a major component of the overall
transport network, with total distance exceeding that of the highway network.
LTP2 funding will be used to support the ROWIP programme of improvements to
provide safe and pleasant traffic free routes to local services that can be
accessed by all sectors of the community. Encouraging people to use the ROW
network for recreational activities promotes a healthier lifestyle and gives support
to the LTP objectives of increasing walking and cycling as viable alternatives to
the private car.
The table below illustrates the extent to which the ROWIP contributes towards
meeting the objectives contained within the shared priorities for transport as well
as general quality of life and asset management factors:
117

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Priority Area LTP2 Strategy Potential ROWIP
Contribution
Improving Accessibility Accessibility Strategy has
highlighted access to
facilities within rural
areas to be a major issue
PROW network can
provide key local links
between remote housing
and local facilities such
as the village shop or
Improving Air Quality
Tackling Congestion
Improving Safety
Asset Management
Quality of Life
Known air quality
problems within
Worcestershire are within
urban areas
Congestion occurs on a
number of key routes
largely within or around
urban centres
Safety issues present
throughout the County in
urban and rural areas.
Better management of
the network
NHS objectives to
achieve a healthier
population and tackle
obesity. Environmental
objectives to achieve a
better environment.
school
Limited contribution other
than through general
promotion of walking and
cycling which could then
filter into fewer local
journeys in urban areas
being made by car
ROWIP could contribute
to tackling localised
congestion (e.g. around a
village school) by
encouraging some trips
to be made on foot
Strong contribution by
providing safer walking
routes in rural areas
A major part of the
ROWIP is the
encouragement of better
asset management for
the PROW network. This
is particularly the case
with, for example ROW
bridges, with a need
identified for enhanced
maintenance budgets
The ROWIP has a strong
role to play in
encouraging healthier
lifestyles, and to a more
environmentally aware
population.
118

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Progress to date
Progress with the development of the ROWIP is summarised below:
• The Local Access Forum has endorsed the general approach to developing
the ROWIP.
• Worcestershire County Councillors have been briefed on the ROWIP process.
• Consultation is completed using the Citizen’s Panel, the County Council
website and direct consultation with key interest groups including landowners.
• Preparation work has begun on the adequacy assessment, with a baseline
condition survey being completed for indicative initial financial estimates.
• Secondary research has been collated.
• Further research with under represented groups is planned as well as further
research with land manager and user groups
• A draft document is expected to go out to consultation in Spring 2006
Therefore, at the start of the LTP2 period, the draft ROWIP is at the consultation
stage.
Network improvement project
Recent baseline condition surveys (representing approx 12.5% of the network)
have provided an estimate of the number of issues that need to be resolved
across the whole network and therefore the costs of such improvements.
It is estimated that £330,000 is needed per annum over the next 10 year life of
the first ROWIP to bring the network up to a good standard. However, this level
of funding is not available within the LTP2 period, although some additional
resources are available in 2006/07 from the County Council’s main budget. This
includes funding for enhancing the main network, and for replacing dangerous
bridges identified on the network (£260,000).
Through the Asset Management Plan, opportunities to secure improvements to
the ROW network as part of LTP2 projects will be identified and taken where
possible. This may involve major maintenance projects or new capital schemes
as appropriate.
Network development and enhancement project
As well as the statutory maintenance works that are undertaken on rights of way,
there are a number of enhancements and further development of the network that
would benefit all users and potential users, which is a key identified element of
the ROWIP. It is estimated that an additional £65,000 will be necessary per
annum to deliver on such improvements.
These would include improvement & enhancement elements of approximately 40
Parish improvement and three development projects. For example, these will
include waymarked circular walking, cycling & horse riding routes and potential
creation of public rights of way where significant gaps have been identified.
119

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Marketing and information programme
A wide variety of information is available on where to go and what to do.
However, this needs more effective coordination and in particular targeting on
key issues such as increasing information on accessibility.
Implications of failure to resource work
There are a number of implications of a failure to effectively resource the work
highlighted above. These include;
• Failure to meet statutory duties on a large percentage of the network in our
management of rights of way in relation to Countryside and Rights of Way Act
2000 and Highways Act 1980.
• Failure to meet in some areas, statutory duties with regard to access, health
and safety and the Disability Discrimination Act.
• An inability to address key elements required in the ROWIP in relation to
improving accessibility and use of the public rights of way network.
Timetable for completion
The following provides an indicative timetable for completion:
• Initial preparation Dec 2004
• Publicise and consult with users, potential users
and landowners Dec 2004 – May 2005
• Further consultation with potential users Jan - May 2006
• Further discussions through focus groups Jan – May 2006
• Adequacy assessment Sep 05 – Jul 06
• Produce draft plan Apr 06
• Consult on draft plan Apr 06 – Aug 06
• Finalise document and produce second draft Jan 07
• Publish final plan Apr 07
Equestrians
In a rural area such as Worcestershire, horse riding is a common form of
transport, largely for recreational purposes. Through the ROWIP, the objective
will be to provide suitable facilities for horseriders, and ensure that the bridleway
network is as safe as possible for riders to use. Liaison with organisations such
as the British Horse Society will be coordinated through the Local Access Forum,
and opportunities identified to improve the equestrian network as part of routine
maintenance works undertaken on the highways and footway network or through
the ROWIP.
Conclusions
The ROWIP provides an exciting opportunity to assess the adequacy of the
whole access network to meet the current and future needs of walkers, cyclists
and riders making journeys for recreational or utilitarian purposes. Increased
120

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
physical activity brings mental, physical and social health benefits, while an
associated reduction in car use reduces air-pollution, improves road safety and
reduces congestion. It can therefore be seen that the ROWIP can make a major
strategic and ultimately operational contribution to improving the PROW network
& access to Worcestershire’s countryside, towns and villages for both local
people and its visitors.
Policy ROW1:Support the development and implementation of the Rights of
Way Improvement Plan, providing an integrated network of utility and
leisure routes for pedestrians, cyclists and horseriders.
Policy ROW2: Manage and promote the development of footpaths,
bridleways and byways for people to walk, cycle and ride on the network.
Policy ROW3: Assess the extent to which local rights of way meet present
and future needs, the opportunities for exercise and recreation as well as
utility journeys, and the accessibility to rights of way for all members of the
community, including those with visibility or mobility problems.
Policy ROW4: Provide the County Council with the information necessary
to plan how the network should be improved in terms of physical
improvements and the provision of better information.
121

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.2.9.5 Employer Travel Plans
Overview
Work has been progressing on the introduction of Travel Plans at major
employment sites across the county, and this has been boosted by an increase in
officer resources available to liaise with employers. Where investment in time
and resources is made to work with employers, benefits are apparent with
improved facilities and information for staff resulting in more sustainable travel.
The following map shows the location of employers that have already developed
Travel Plans and it can be seen that these are concentrated in the Worcester and
Malvern areas, with smaller numbers of employers already signed up in other
towns.
Existing Employers
Employer networks have been established in some areas of the County, notably
within Worcester, where experience can be shared, and these will be expanded
to other parts of the County. In Malvern, the Local Strategic Partnership is
pressing local employers to develop Travel Plans, and working through
partnerships in this way will be invaluable to promoting Travel Plan development
across the County.
It is intended that LTP funding will be used to support Travel Plan development
by employers, through match-funding improvements such as cycle parking
provision, installation of showers or lockers, constructing improvements on
walking and cycling routes to a site, such as pedestrian crossings across major
roads, and improvements to bus stops. Further assistance will be given on the
preparation of publicity material and information for employees.
122

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The employer concerned will be expected to contribute towards the Travel Plan
development both by committing staff resources and financial resources to the
project. Evidence of ongoing commitment to the operation of the Plan will also be
required.
All major employers and employment sites will be targeted initially, with the
programme of work rolling out to smaller employers and sites as resources allow.
Within Worcester, this work will be undertaken through the Sustainable Travel
Town project, which has secured funding for a specific Travel Plan co-ordinator to
work with employers based in the city.
Policy ETP1: Support for Employer Travel Plans, including grant support to
assist employers in delivering local travel planning initiatives.
New Developments
The County Council already requires that major new developments should
produce and implement a Travel Plan, and has received good support from all six
District Councils in the enforcement of this policy. Within the Design Guide for
Transportation in New Developments, to be published during 2006, the Council
will set out clearly when a Travel Pan is required, and what that Plan will be
expected to cover.
In effect, a Travel Plan will be expected for any development for which a
Transportation Assessment is produced. These are essentially those
developments exceeding the thresholds set out in Annex D of PPG13 (table
referring to Maximum Parking Standards). In addition, housing developments
exceeding 100 units will be expected to produce a Travel Plan outlining the
measures that the developer will take to promote sustainable travel to the
residents of the new houses (for example – through the preparation of “welcome
packs” containing information on bus services, walk / cycle routes etc., and
incentives to use these such as a free bus pass or bike per household).
Implementation of the Travel Plan will be monitored and suitable financial
incentives or penalties identified to ensure that such implementation is carried
through with commitment by those responsible for the Plan.
Policy ETP2: Work with District Councils to ensure that all new
developments exceeding certain thresholds will be required to prepare and
implement Travel Plans.
Worcestershire County Council Travel Plan
Worcestershire County Council is the largest employer within the County, with
19,877 employees in total. These are based at many locations across the
County, including the 270 schools. The Council recognises that it therefore has a
major role to play in encouraging sustainable travel for work journeys and for
commuting. Action to date has included involving school staff in the development
of School Travel Plans, and in the development of a County Hall Travel Plan.
1,400 staff are employed at the County Hall complex on the eastern edge of
Worcester, although further expansion to 1,600 staff on site is programmed for
2007, and it is recognised that this site is a major generator of work journeys.
123

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The County Hall Travel Plan was established in 2004 following approval from
Cabinet, and during 2005 it was strengthened with the recruitment of a County
Council Travel Plan Officer dedicated to reducing the number of car journeys
made by County Council employees for work.
In 2004 a car sharing database was established for County Council staff as part
of the Travel Plan, and this has been widely publicised through events and
information on the Intranet website that is used by staff. The database has
proved popular, with almost 600 members to date. In 2005, the car park at
County Hall has been reorganised to give priority parking to car sharers with
enforcement in place. This gives further incentives for staff to car share, given
pressures on car parking capacity at the campus.
Improvements have also been made to shower facilities, lockers and cycle
parking provision at County Hall, with 83 spaces now available. Safer walking
and cycling routes to County Hall have been identified and some improvement
made to their condition where necessary through better surfacing and lighting on
footpaths, and construction of new cycle routes, notably linking to the Warndon
and St Peter’s residential areas. Public transport routes to County Hall have been
widely publicised to staff and visitors, and a direct bus service is now available
from County Hall to Malvern, where staff postcode plots have illustrated that a
significant proportion of County employees live.
The County Council is also enhancing flexible working arrangements for staff,
including the introduction of a nine day fortnight , improved flexi-time
arrangements, and better access to home-working including investment in better
information technology to allow staff to work from home more easily.
These measures are intended to demonstrate to local employers that the County
Council is serious about the introduction of Travel Plans and intends to take a
lead to demonstrate that such measures can work with the appropriate
commitment.
Policy ETP3: The County Council will continue to lead by example by
further development and implementation of a Travel Plan covering all
Council employees and buildings.
4.2.9.6 School Travel Plans
Overview
The major single strategy area during the first Local Transport Plan was the
development of the Safer Routes to School (SRtS) programme, which sought to
ensure that all County schools had measures identified and implemented to
encourage pupils to walk or cycle to school. Completion of physical
improvements at many schools has enabled a greater focus to be placed upon
the development of School Travel Plans (STP). These place more emphasis
upon publicity, promotion of walking and cycling, car sharing schemes amongst
parents and walking buses, thereby maximising the benefits of physical
infrastructure improvements. The school transport hierarchy is the promotion of
school trips by walking, then cycling and finally by bus, with car trips being the
lowest priority.
124

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The map below shows the distribution of schools within Worcestershire that have
developed a STP or have participated within the SRtS programme. This
indicates that the majority of schools have either developed a STP or have had
infrastructure measures implemented as part of the SRtS programme. Most
schools that are still to do either are located within the Wyre Forest area, where
the Schools Review has meant that going ahead with SRtS measures could have
been abortive, and at rural schools where the dispersed nature of catchments
mean that school bus travel is particularly important rather than walking and
cycling to school.
Experience has shown that the STP approach is more successful in encouraging
modal shift and reduced car use for school journeys than the improvements to
infrastructure alone. This is indicated from the survey results reported on through
the Annual Progress Reports for LTP1.
Examples of Schools that have demonstrated modal shift since
developing a School Travel Plan
Percenatge
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2001 2005
Year
Walking - Pendock
Primary
Car Use - Pendock
Primary
Walking - Lea Street First
School
Car Use - Lea Street First
School
125

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Travel Plans
Therefore, within LTP2 the approach will be to concentrate upon the development
of STPs at all County schools. This is in line with national policy. LTP2 funding
will continue to be used for the physical infrastructure improvements required to
support the introduction of a STP.
In addition, opportunities to link Travel Plan development with other related
initiatives such as Healthy Schools and Eco-schools will be taken to emphasise
the connections between walking, cycling, personal health and environmental
issues. A co-ordinated approach between these initiatives will be developed in
conjunction with Education Services and other agencies.
School transport provision will also be reviewed and opportunities for the
introduction of a pilot project for the introduction of dedicated school buses
(“Yellow” buses) identified. One key opportunity may result from the Wyre Forest
Schools Review, where a number of changes to education provision, including
new schools and catchment area changes, will provide a major chance to
influence travel to school in a positive way.
126

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
As part of the proposed County-wide concessionary fares scheme, it is planned
to provide concessionary travel for young students in the 16-19 year old age
group. This will assist with travel to colleges and further education facilities, as
well as for leisure and other activities.
Policy STP1: Development of School Travel Plans for all County schools
and the implementation of infrastructure improvements where appropriate
to support these plans.
Policy STP2: Review the provision of school transport across the County,
and consider the introduction of “Yellow” buses on a pilot basis to assess
their potential role in reducing car use for school travel.
Policy STP3: Identify opportunities to re-organise public transport services
to offer travel to students who don’t currently qualify for specific school
transport provision.
Policy STP4: Develop a greater cohesion between school travel plan
development and other initiatives, such as healthy schools and ecoschools,
including a wider involvement with curriculum-based activities.
4.2.9.7 Motorcycling
The County Council recognises that the motorcycle offers a sustainable form of
transport which can play a significant role in reducing traffic congestion,
particularly in urban areas where road networks can be constrained. A
Motorcycle Forum has been established within Worcestershire, and through this
opportunities to improve conditions for motorcyclists will be identified.
LTP2 funding will be set aside to implement improvements such as secure
parking at major attractions and minor improvements to road layouts to assist
motorcyclists.
The County Motorcycle forum will provide the catalyst for:-
• Ideas and actions to encourage more positive thinking towards two wheeled
riders
• Promoting users to make the right choice of motorcycle for their actual day-to
day needs
• Encouraging the take up of further training to show how riding a motorcycle
can be safe and show the benefits of wearing modern safety clothing and
equipment.
A website, newsletter and events will aim to widen the appeal of motorcycling and
other measures such as permitting access for motorcyclists to bus lanes and
advanced cycle lanes will be considered
Policy MC1: To support motorcycling through the provision of secure
motorcycle parking at key locations and through appropriate traffic
management measures.
127

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Policy MC2: To work with partners to develop the Motorcycle Forum and
through the Forum identify and implement measures that will improve
safety and convenience of motorcycling.
Policy MC3: To encourage the take up of motorcycling through the
Motorcycle Forum as a real alternative mode of transport with positive
promotion and education of its benefits
4.2.9.8 Freight
Freight Quality Partnership
The County-wide Freight Quality Partnership (FQP) has been successful in
bringing together a range of bodies with an interest in freight issues, and
initiatives such as the County Lorry Map (see below) have been developed
through the partnership.
The recently published Regional Freight Strategy also highlights the importance
of the easy movement of goods across the West Midlands to support the local
economy and provide the services that people need for their day to day activities.
Policy FQP1:Support to the Freight Quality Partnership in identifying
solutions to local issues relevant to the improved movement of freight in a
sustainable way.
128

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Lorry Parking
The FQP and the Regional Lorry Parking Study (May 2005) have both highlighted
an inadequate provision of lorry parking facilities within Worcestershire. At
present, overnight lorry parking facilities within the County are limited to the
following sites:
• M5 – Motorway Service Areas at Strensham (100 spaces northbound, 60
spaces southbound) and Frankley;
• M42 – Motorway Service Area at Hopwood (Junction 2- 45 spaces);
• A46(T) – Vale Truckstop between Evesham and Tewkesbury (40 spaces);
• A38 – Upton-upon-Severn (near M50 Junction 1) – formed in a stretch of
disused road.
• Kidderminster Town Centre (New Road Car Park)
• Worcester City Centre (Croft Road Car Park)
• Upton-upon Severn town centre
The motorway facilities are not well located to meet local needs, and drivers are
discouraged from using them by high charges. The M5 corridor through
Worcestershire has been identified within the regional study as requiring
additional lorry parking, with high charges at Strensham and lack of capacity at
Frankley resulting in overnight parking occurring at other less suitable locations
within the County.
The regional study has also identified a need for overnight lorry parking on the
following strategic routes:
• A4103 Hereford – Worcester;
• A44 Leominster – Worcester.
Additionally, a need for lorry parking facilities close to a freight generating areas
(e.g. industrial estates, town centres) has been identified for Kidderminster and
Redditch.
The facility at Croft Road within Worcester is used by approximately 25 lorries per
night, but the City Council are reviewing the future of this car park and have an
aspiration to close the facility to help form a riverside park as part of a city centre
enhancement project. No replacement facilities have yet been identified, but the
County Council will support the creation of high quality and secure lorry parking
facilities at suitable locations within the city.
New overnight lorry parking facilities could potentially be co-ordinated with Park
and Ride proposals for Worcester, or with new or existing industrial sites across
the County. Priority areas identified by the FQP include Worcester,
Kidderminster and Evesham.
Policy FQP2: Working through the FQP, identify suitable locations for new
lorry parking facilities across the County to meet the needs identified
above, using LTP funding to support delivery of these facilities.
129

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Rail / Water Freight Haulage
At present there are no major rail freight facilities located within Worcestershire, and
most potential sites for such facilities are located away from the strategic road
network, meaning that use as road / rail freight interchanges would generate HGV
movements on unsuitable roads.
However, opportunities exist for the development of facilities at locations outside
Worcestershire, but which would serve operators within the County, notably at
Ashchurch near Tewkesbury which has good access to the strategic road and rail
networks, and is convenient for the Vale of Evesham.
The County Council will support the development of railfreight facilities within the
County as well as the use of facilities that are conveniently accessed from the
County.
The River Severn is a historic transport corridor which is now used predominantly for
leisure boat traffic. However, there is potential for greater use to be made of the
waterway for freight movement, and a £2.5 million project for the transfer of sand and
gravel by RCM Material in South Worcestershire has been developed with the
assistance of a DfT grant. This will enable 2.75 million tonnes of aggregates to be
moved by barge between Ripple and Ryall, saving 340,000 lorry movements on the
local road network. This project highlights the potential that the river has for freight
transfer, and the County Council will support further such initiatives.
Policy FQP3: To explore the greater use of rail and inland waterways for the
carriage of freight within the County.
Location of Freight Generating Activity
Within Worcestershire, freight generating activity, particularly related to the
agricultural industry, has often developed in rural areas with poor access to the
strategic road network. This is a particular problem within the Vale of Evesham,
and the establishment of the Vale of Evesham FQP in partnership with
Gloucestershire and Warwickshire County Councils was a response to the
resulting conflict between local communities and the freight generators over the
impact of heavy goods vehicles.
The County Council will therefore seek to work with the Local Planning Authority
to ensure that new proposals for freight generating activities such as packhouses
and distribution centres are directed to locations with good access to the strategic
road and / or rail networks. In addition, existing activities will be encouraged to
re-locate from environmentally sensitive locations to more accessible sites.
Policy FQP4: Work with District Councils to identify opportunities for the
re-location of freight generators from environmentally sensitive locations to
sites with direct access to strategic road or rail network
130

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.3 CONGESTION
131

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.3.1 Tackling Congestion
Overview
Whilst Worcestershire may not in general suffer the same level of congestion as
some Major Urban Areas, there are some parts of the County’s highway network
that offer a poor level of service to road users due to capacity problems.
The map below indicates the sections of the local highway network within
Worcestershire where traffic congestion is at its worst. This data has been
collated using a mixture of traffic flow and speed information, real time journey
time data, and data from traffic signal operations.
Three levels of congestion are identified, as follows:
• Red Routes – roads that are prone to congestion at any time of day, and at
weekends as well as weekdays.
• Amber Routes – roads that are generally congested at peak periods, and are
prone to congestion at off-peak periods on weekdays.
• Yellow Routes – roads that are generally congested during weekday peak
periods.
132

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The routes that are most prone to congestion (the Red Routes) are:
• Worcester – focussed on the river crossings on the A4440 Worcester
Southern Link Road, and in Worcester city centre
• Kidderminster – A456 Kidderminster Ring Road (northern section)
• Bromsgrove – A38 between Bromsgrove and M42 Junction 1
• Evesham – A4184 within the town centre.
Elsewhere in the County, the main routes affected by weekday or peak period
congestion (Amber and Yellow Routes) are:
• Bromsgrove – A38 between Bromsgrove and M5 Junction 5.
• Worcester – radial routes into the city centre
• Kidderminster – radial routes into the town centre, particularly the A449 and
A451 to the south
• Stourport-on-Severn- routes within the town centre, notably the A451 and
A4025.
• Malvern – A449 in Malvern Link.
• Evesham – radial routes into the town centre, and A46 (T) Evesham Bypass.
• Redditch – A441 in the southern part of the town.
• Holt Fleet – A4133 route crossing the River Severn between Holt Heath and
Ombersley which provides a major east-west route north of Worcester.
• Rubery – A38 from M5 Junction 4 into Birmingham
Some areas of the County also suffer from seasonal congestion resulting from
high visitor numbers during the peak tourist season. This is particularly evident in
the vicinity of key attractions such as the West Midlands Safari Park, which can
result in traffic congestion on approach roads including Kidderminster town
centre, in historic towns and city centres (e.g. Stourport-on-Severn), and at
natural attractions, such as the Malvern Hills.
On the Trunk Road network, traffic congestion is a significant problem at peak
periods at many of the motorway junctions that provide the access points to the
M5 and M42 from the local network. The Highways Agency have identified
specific problems at the following junctions:
• M5 motorway – Junctions 4,5,6 and 7
• M42 Motorway – Junctions 1, 2 and 3
In addition, traffic congestion on the M42 to the east of Junction 3 occurs when
queuing traffic builds up from the merging of traffic at the M42 / M40 interchange.
The Highways Agency has invested heavily in the Active Traffic Management
System which will seek to smooth the traffic flows on the M42 between Junctions
3a (M42) and 6 (M6) through a range of measures including variable speed limits,
better driver information and peak period use of the hard shoulder as a running
lane. The impact of these measures, which are to be fully introduced by Spring
2007, on the M42 in Worcestershire will be monitored.
133

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Between 1999 and 2004, traffic flows within Worcestershire grew by 1.4%, or an
average of 1% per annum. The table below shows traffic growth from recent
years (2004-05) for a selection of sites across Worcestershire.
Ranked Traffic Growth In Worcestershire
Location 2004 2005 %
1 A44 Wyre Piddle By pass 10393 11589 11.5
2 A491 Hagley 22701 24071 6
3 A4440 Swinesherd Way 20141 20827 3.4
4 A456 Mamble 3458 3531 2.1
5 A441 Bordesley 20640 21039 1.9
6 A4133 Holt Fleet 12203 12407 1.7
7 A38 Lickey End 30994 31277 0.9
8 A422 Spetchley 8650 8720 0.8
9 A44 Broadway By-pass 8417 8486 0.8
10 A456 Kidderminster/Bewdley 21302 21422 0.6
11 A451 Kidderminster Ring Rd 31114 31283 0.5
12 A44 Whittington (m'way) 31543 31382 0.5
13 A449 Powick 20534 20625 0.4
14 A451 Stourport Bridge 15856 15905 0.3
15 A44 Bromyard Rd 10371 10393 0.2
16 A4440 Broomhall Way 25957 25970 0
17 A4440 Temeside Way 32246 32145 0
18 A449 Barbourne Rd 25576 25503 -0.3
19 A451 Minster Rd 18027 17908 -0.7
20 B4084 Pershore (Allesborough) 11121 10997 -1.2
21 A4104 Welland 2616 2567 -1.9
22 B4090 Bewdley Bridge 16886 16505 -2.3
23 B4485 Bransford Rd 4115 4000 -2.8
24 A438 Bushley 4204 4035 -4
25 B4084 Hampton 10415 9888 -5.1
0.7
All figures quoted are 24 hour 7-day 2 way flows (AADT)
It is clear from the LTP2 consultation that traffic congestion is considered a threat
to Worcestershire achieving its full economic potential and fulfilling its role as a
Sub-region within the West Midlands. Of 585 respondents to the LTP2
consultation survey, 230 (39%) highlighted tackling congestion as one of their top
three transport priorities. This, along with bus issues, was the most reported
issue and demonstrates that although congestion in Worcestershire is not as
heavy as in major urban areas, there are significant localised problems across
the County.
In addition, during the consultation process concerns were expressed by the local
business community, through the Chamber of Commerce and Local Strategic
Partnerships, about the impact that congestion is having upon the local economy.
In particular, the role of Malvern as a focus for high technology industry was
questioned if strategic access to the motorway network continues to be
constrained due to congestion on the Worcester Southern Link Road.
134

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Therefore, the need to resolve congestion issues in the Worcester area has been
highlighted as a priority for Worcestershire as a whole. The Area Strategy for
Worcester outlines a package of sustainable travel and passenger transport
measures that will seek to reduce congestion during the LTP2 period, but there is
a clear need for a major review of the transport strategy for the city. A
transportation study will therefore be carried out during 2005/06 as the starting
point to identifying the long-term transport strategy for Worcester to fulfil its
regional role, and to ensure that strategic access to Malvern is improved.
Similarly, within the Wyre Forest area, congestion will potentially constrain
economic regeneration activity within the Stourport Road Employment Corridor,
and therefore there is a need to re-assess the transport strategy required in this
area. A transport study for Stourport-on-Severn has identified the Relief Road as
being a worthwhile, but expensive scheme (£47 million), and it is acknowledged
that funding will not to be secured for this major road proposal in the LTP2 period.
Therefore, a transportation study will be undertaken for the Wyre Forest area,
focussing on the Stourport Road Employment Corridor, to identify the appropriate
long-term strategy that will allow economic regeneration in this deprived area of
the County.
These two studies are likely to result in the identification of transport schemes
that will require significant investment and it is likely that major scheme bids will
be prepared for these strategies. These will be prepared during the LTP2 period
with a view to constructing the identified schemes during the LTP3 period (2011-
16).
The LTP2 strategy for dealing with congestion, based upon the analysis and
consultation process, is as follows:
4.3.1.1 Managing Demand
• Facilitate more sustainable behaviour
• Long term consideration of the travel implications associated with new
development, and ensuring that due regard is taken on the implications of car
dependence when determining future land-use patterns
• Employer Travel Planning that seeks to reduce the demand for travel by
encouraging home and flexible working
• School Travel Planning, working with the education directorates to consider
the start and finish times of schools to avoid peak periods
• River Crossings. Examining the impacts of the limited crossing points, and
wider solutions as to how demand can be managed across these crossing
points.
• Network Management – better co-ordination of highway works across the
County to minimise the impact of such works on traffic movement.
Implementation of the Traffic Management Act and improved systems for
getting travel information to the public.
• Rail Network Management – ensuring that the County rail network offers a
true alternative to the car for key journeys, particularly those along the Central
Technology Belt connecting locations such as Malvern, Bromsgrove,
Worcester and Birmingham.
135

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.3.1.2 Accommodating Demand
• Implementing the proposed Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy, such
that an efficient and effective network of public transport routes exists, with
sufficient priority to ensure such modes offer real advantage over the private
car
• Employer and School Travel Planning, promoting walk, cycle, public transport
and car sharing as means of reducing the impact of individual site operations.
In particular working with health and education sectors to ensure all benefits
associated with such programmes are captured.
• Implementing the walk, cycle and motorbike strategy, to ensure that realistic,
safe and healthy alternatives exist to the private car.
• Implementing the Intelligent Transport System strategy, in particular improved
traffic management and control techniques to improve the flow of traffic in
urban areas.
• Implementing the car parking strategy to ensure spaces are used as a
effective means of managing demand and promoting alternatives to the
private car in urban areas.
Of particular relevance are the opportunities associated with the Sustainable
Travel Town Initiative for Worcester. This revenue supported initiative will be
supported with capital investment during the second LTP to ensure the growth of
the city does not compromise it’s environmental or economic regeneration
objectives, and enables the City to realise it’s potential as a sub-regional focus.
Other specific measures to tackle congestion at individual locations are included
under the relevant District Strategy, with the major project being to improve
capacity along the A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road.
4.3.1.3 Parking Strategy
Car parking management is a shared function between County (on-street parking
and Worcester North Park & Ride) and District Councils (off-street parking), whilst
the private sector is also responsible for significant amounts of off-street public
parking, notably within Redditch, Worcester and Kidderminster.
Therefore, a co-ordinated countywide parking strategy will need partnership
working, particularly with regard to charging policies and parking enforcement.
The main elements of the parking strategy are:
• The development of a network of Park and Ride sites serving Worcester.
• The introduction of Decriminalised Parking Enforcement throughout the
County.
• Joint working with Car Parking Operators and passenger transport operators
to co-ordinate charging regimes with overall transport strategy to promote
best use of the local transport network.
• To encourage the provision of secure parking facilities for cycles and
motorcycles in town centres and at other trip destinations.
• Linkage between parking and integrated passenger transport strategies.
136

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Decriminalised Parking Enforcement
To date, Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) has been introduced in two
Districts within the County, these being Worcester City (in 2002) and Wychavon
(2004).
This has led to an improvement in the resources available to enforce on and offstreet
parking restrictions, with associated benefits for traffic management, road
user safety and bus service reliability. In both cases, DPE has been introduced
through a partnership involving the District Council, County Council and West
Mercia Constabulary.
It is intended that these partnerships will be used as a model for the rollout of
DPE to other District areas within the County during the LTP2 period. All other
District Councils have carried out initial feasibility work to identify the potential for
DPE within their areas, and the County Council will encourage all Districts to take
this work forward. In particular, opportunities for joint working across authority
areas, sharing operating systems and gaining efficiencies, will be encouraged.
Policy PARK1:Work with District Councils to ensure that Decriminalised
Parking Enforcement is rolled out across the County by 2011.
Car Park Management
During the LTP2 period, the County Council will seek to work with Worcester City
Council and other District Councils to identify and implement a combined parking
strategy embracing charging regimes, signing and parking information which will
encourage Park and Ride use, and will also co-ordinate with bus services and
fare levels. Elements of such co-ordination will include:
• Co-ordination of charges for city centre car parks and Park and Ride sites to
encourage motorists to use the most appropriate car park facility.
• Improved signing to car parks, including information on availability of spaces,
to ensure that motorists access car parks by the most appropriate routes and
to avoid wasteful circulating traffic.
• Improved information on car parks availability issued by other publicity routes,
including the County Council website.
Policy PARK2: Work with District Councils and private car park operators
to ensure that car parking management is co-ordinated with other
transportation policy, parking charges are co-ordinated to achieve the
objectives of the LTP strategy, and that information on car park occupancy
is shared and disseminated to the public.
4.3.1.4 Intelligent Transport Systems
Technology has significant potential to improve traffic management capability
within the County, and improve the quality of information given to the travelling
137

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
public. At present, use of technology within the County is relatively limited.
There is an Urban Traffic Control (UTC) system in place within Worcester city
centre, but this is not used to its full potential, and elsewhere in the County traffic
signals do not tend to be operationally linked.
CCTV systems are available in some town and city centres, but these are
primarily used for public security rather than traffic management. West Mercia
Constabulary has also submitted a bid for Home Office funding for the installation
of Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras across the County.
Whilst the primary purpose of such cameras is to aid crime detection, there is a
clear opportunity for using such installations to aid traffic management through
better monitoring of real time traffic conditions, such as journey time monitoring
on key parts of the road network such as the Worcester Southern Link Road.
Some real time car park information is displayed on roadside signs, but these
tend to be close to the car parks involved and are not located to influence route
choice.
Some information kiosks have been installed within Worcester to give public
transport information to people at key locations, such as Worcester Hospital.
These do not have real-time information, however, and are therefore of limited
use. Similarly, the County Council website has bus and rail timetable information,
but this is again not on a real time basis.
The County Council has a partnership with the Highways Agency’s Traffic Control
Centre to exchange information on road conditions and incidents affecting traffic
flow on both the Trunk Road and local road networks.
The County Council recognises that far more use can be made of technology to
get better and up to date information to the public on travel conditions for all
modes of transport.
The ITS strategy is therefore to:
• Harness technology to improve the flow of travel information to the public by a
variety of means.
• Use the County Council website as a key tool in the dissemination of real time
travel information to the public.
• Enhance Urban Traffic Control systems, using technology to give us the
capability to respond to prevailing traffic conditions and to keep traffic flowing.
• Provide priority to buses, taxis and emergency service vehicles using
technology to track vehicles and adjusting signal settings appropriately.
• Provide accurate and up to date information on car park occupancy, directing
drivers to the most appropriate car park for their journey.
Urban Traffic Management and Control
The County Council recognises that better use can be made of technology to
manage traffic within the Counties’ main centres. Accordingly, within LTP2 it is
proposed that an UTMC system be established which would include the following
functions:
138

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• UTMC central system- computer hardware and software that manages
databases, communications between different agencies, and provides the
interface between all ITS elements.
• Network Management Centre – the establishment of a control centre
housing staff responsible for the Traffic Management Act duties. The centre
will be the focal point for traffic and transport information management for the
County.
• Development of UTMC system within Worcester – review and upgrade as
necessary the existing SCOOT traffic control system covering Worcester city
centre, with extension to outlying junctions as appropriate. The system would
also allow the provision of bus priority at signals as well as priority for
emergency vehicles.
• Incident Management – inclusion of incident management technology within
the SCOOT system, ensuring that suitable links are made to the CCTV
system and ANPR cameras that are operated and proposed by the City
Council and West Mercia Constabulary.
• Introduction of Variable Message signs - within Worcester city centre,
Kidderminster town centre, and at key locations across the County to manage
traffic flows during, for example, bridge closures or flooding incidents. These
schemes will link to car park information signs within the town centres to give
real time information on car park occupancy.
• Journey time systems – work with West Mercia Constabulary on the
introduction of ANPR cameras that will enable monitoring of individual
vehicles across the network to establish journey times between fixed points.
This would allow monitoring of network performance and the easier
identification of congestion problems or other unusual traffic patterns.
• Air quality monitoring – the installation of equipment allowing real time
monitoring of air quality indicators. Where poor air quality is detected,
appropriate traffic management measures can be taken through the UTMC
system to manage traffic away from the affected area thereby allowing air
quality to recover.
Policy ITS1: To develop systems using technology to allow proactive
management of traffic within town centres, including the ability to respond
rapidly to incidents on the highway network, and to provide accurate up-todate
information to the travelling public on travel conditions.
Policy ITS2: To ensure that systems are compatible with other databases to
allow rapid exchange of information to assist with traffic management.
Integrated Passenger Transport IT Systems
Getting people the correct and up to date information on travel conditions is
crucial to the ability to manage travel patterns. A number of mechanisms apply,
including:
139

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Real time passenger information – obtaining accurate, up to date
information on how public transport services are performing, and getting this
information out to the travelling public through variable message signs at bus
stops, travel information on websites, and text messaging services to mobile
phones.
• Travel information systems – the County Council will consider joining the
MATISSE consortium. This is a partnership of authorities and agencies
responsible for traffic and transport across the West Midlands. The MATISSE
system effectively links databases from all agencies and distributes
information out to participating authorities. This covers the motorway and
local road network, railways and bus services across the West Midlands
conurbation, Warwickshire and Leicestershire.
• Provision of accurate route planning – by giving information to travellers
through the Traveline and Transport Direct information systems.
• SMARTCARD ticketing – work with public transport operators and other
partners to promote the use of Smartcard technology, particularly for multiple
uses such as concessionary fares, car parking, other concessions, and bus
fare payment.
• Demand Responsive Centre – the ITS system would also potentially link to
the call centre for bookings for demand responsive bus services, and to other
forms of public transport such as taxibus services, community transport, nonemergency
patient transport and other health services.
Policy ITS3: To develop with partners systems which permit proper
integration of public transport services and the collation and dissemination
of real time information on public transport services to the travelling public.
Policy ITS4: To develop integrated ticketing and booking systems to give
passengers a seamless journey.
4.3.1.5 Network Management
In response to the Traffic Management Act, the County Council has set up a
Network Control team within the Highways and Transportation Management
Service. It is the responsibility of this team to ensure that works on the highway
network do not cause undue inconvenience to road users, that they are carried
out in a safe manner, and properly co-ordinated with other activities.
A key objective is to ensure that traffic congestion caused by works on the
highway is kept to a minimum. It is acknowledged that congestion will inevitably
result from works in sensitive locations, such as at bridges where limited
alternative routes are available, but even in these cases congestion can be
minimised by getting good quality and accurate information out to the travelling
public.
Programming of works to avoid planned events such as local festivals or the
Three Counties Agricultural Show, which can generate significant traffic flows is
also a role of the Network Management team, and the success of this approach
was demonstrated with the Upton Viaduct replacement where construction works
were programmed to avoid local events within the town as much as possible.
140

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The Network Management team co-ordinate with all organisations with
responsibility for traffic management or for operations affecting the highway
network. These include:
• Highways Agency – to ensure that road-works on both local and Trunk
Roads are co-ordinated and managed properly. Road works on the motorway
network in Worcestershire invariably cause traffic congestion due to the high
traffic flows carried on the motorways. This often leads to severe congestion
on local roads, especially the A38 through Worcester, Droitwich and
Bromsgrove, as drivers seek alternative routes. Similarly, work on local roads
can impact on motorways, particularly at motorway interchanges. Therefore it
is critical that there is an exchange of information between the two highway
authorities.
• National / Regional Traffic Control Centres – the Highways Agency has
established a National Traffic Control Centre, to manage the flow on
information regarding traffic movements on the national motorway network,
and a regional Traffic Control centre to manage traffic flows across the West
Midlands Trunk Road network. The County Council has an Operating
Agreement with these centres to ensure that information on planned works
and on unplanned incidents (accidents or vehicle breakdown) is exchanged
between the highway authorities and the police. It is hoped that this
partnership will be enhanced further in future years, especially once the ITS
strategy is implemented within Worcestershire.
• Public Utilities – liaison with public utility operators is maintained through the
Highways and Utilities Area Co-ordination (HUAC) group, which meets
regularly to share information on planned works that will affect the highway
network. These could be local authority schemes to maintain or improve the
road, a gas main renewal, or cabling works within the footway. The main
objective is to ensure that where possible, these works do not conflict with
each other (e.g. to ensure that where major road works are proposed that will
cause congestion, that a diversion route is identified and kept clear of road
works). Where opportunities for phasing works so that, for example, a utility
scheme is completed prior to a major road re-surfacing scheme, programmes
will be adjusted to minimise disruption to the travelling public. The County
Council has powers to sanction companies that do not co-operate in this
process, or who over-run road works for no good reason.
• West Mercia Constabulary – systems are in place to ensure proper
exchange of information between the County Council and the police on
planned works and unplanned incidents to ensure that traffic management
issues are properly addressed.
• Travel information – a major effort has been made to ensure close liaison
with the media within Worcestershire, with the objective of making sure that
the public get advance warning of planned works, and up to date accurate
information on traffic conditions. The implementation of the ITS strategy will
assist in this process, by enabling the provision of real time information on
traffic and travel conditions via media such as the County Council website. At
present, much advance information is also provided through the location of
warning signs ahead of planned works to ensure that people can alter their
travel patterns if they are able to.
141

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Policy TM1:
To ensure that systems are in place to allow
proper programming of highway works and management of planned and
unplanned works / incidents to ensure that congestion is minimised.
Policy TM2:
To maintain close liaison with the Highways
Agency, West Mercia Constabulary and other interested organisations to
ensure a continual flow of up to date and accurate information on traffic
and travel conditions, including planned works and unplanned incidents.
142

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.4 ROAD SAFETY
143

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Overview
The number of people killed or seriously injured on Worcestershire’s roads is now
less than 300 each year, which when compared to the 1994-98 baseline of 550
means that the Government target of achieving a 40% reduction in casualties
against this baseline by 2010 has already been achieved.
In addition, the number of children killed or seriously injured on Worcestershire’s
roads has reduced from a base of 60 to just over 20 per year, which again means
that the national target of a 50% reduction by 2010 has been met.
These trends represent a major achievement, and demonstrate that the Road
Safety Strategy adopted in the first Local Transport Plan has been extremely
successful.
Number of People Killed or Seriously Injured on Worcestershire's Roads
Number of People Killed or
Seriously Injured
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
Avg
1994-
1998
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
Actual Trajectory Target
Number of Children Killed or Seriously Injured on Worcestershire's Roads
Number of Children Killed or
Seriously Injured
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Avg
1994-
1998
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
Actual Trajectory Target
144

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
To continue this progress into the LTP2 period, it is clear that a far greater
emphasis will need to be placed upon the education and enforcement elements
of the road safety strategy, as the number of single sites where engineering
measures could bring about major reductions in casualties is small. Identifying
those sectors of the community where the greatest impact can be achieved
through education and road safety promotion will be an important element of this
work and the increasingly elderly population within the County will need to be
targeted. In addition, motorcyclists are one group where casualty reduction is not
being achieved and where greater efforts will be required.
The County Council is an active member of the West Mercia Safety Camera
Partnership, which commenced operations in April 2003. Government is
changing the way in which such Partnerships are funded in April 2007, and LTP2
will need to reflect this. LTP2 also contains a Speed Management Strategy that
will seek to ensure that a consistent approach to the setting of speed restrictions
is adopted throughout the County.
The County Council is proud of the progress made in the first LTP period in
reducing road traffic accident casualties on the Worcestershire network, and
achieving the 2010 targets by 2005, five years ahead of schedule. The County
Council will seek to continue this trend during LTP2, and will continue to invest
heavily both in engineering measures to tackle accident cluster sites, in road
safety training, education and publicity, and in speed reduction activity.
Policy RS1:To ensure that any activity on the transport network will
improve the safety of all users, irrespective of the prime objective of that
activity.
4.4.1 Engineering
Within Worcestershire, the accident trends on the local road network are
consistently monitored, and analysis undertaken to identify cluster sites. A
cluster site is defined as a location on the road network (generally a 50 metre
section) where at least three accidents resulting in personal injury have occurred
over a three year period. These sites are prioritised according to the severity of
the casualties recorded, and by giving a higher weighting to accidents involving
vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, cyclists, the elderly and the young.
Even though there remain around 400 cluster sites on the County network, it is
becoming increasingly difficult to identify single sites where a casualty reduction
scheme such as a junction improvement will have a major impact upon casualties
as the numbers involved, even at the worst sites, are generally low. Therefore,
within LTP2 a greater focus will be placed upon route action plans, where a
longer section of road is investigated and a string of casualty reduction schemes
implemented tackling a number of cluster sites. Where possible, these plans will
be co-ordinated with other areas of activity, such as new developments, asset
management (including maintenance works), and other transport improvements
(for example – bus stop improvements as part of a service improvement along a
corridor) to promote an integrated approach and to maximise value for money.
Route Action Plans will primarily apply to rural routes. However, within urban
areas, the approach will be based on the development of Area Action Plans,
where a wider area will be investigated and an area-wide scheme implemented.
145

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Again, this will be co-ordinated with other areas of activity as listed above, along
with Community Safety projects identified by Community Safety Partnerships,
and with other specific projects (for example, projects within areas of deprivation).
Where a cluster site, identified through the accident analysis undertaken by the
County Council, will be affected by traffic or pedestrian movements generated by
a new development, the developer will be expected to provide funding for the
engineering measures to reduce casualties at that particular location. This could
be through investment in a junction improvement, a new pedestrian crossing or
other similar measures aimed at tackling the specific problem identified through
the analysis.
Accident data will be reviewed on an annual basis through accident analysis,
and a listing produced each year identifying known and any new cluster sites.
Policy RS2: To further reduce casualties through the implementation of
casualty reduction schemes at identified cluster sites, and through the
implementation of Route Action Plans and Area Action Plans to tackle
groups of cluster sites.
Policy RS3: Where an identified cluster site will be affected by traffic or
other travel demand generated by a new development, the developer will be
expected to provide funding to implement schemes to tackle the specific
casualty problem.
4.4.2 Education
Overview
The Road Safety team undertakes road safety education, training and publicity
for the County Council. This takes a number of forms, as follows:
• Road Safety, pedestrian and cycle training in schools;
• Driver Improvement training for County Council staff, including minibus
assessment;
• Driver improvement courses for offenders;
• Child Car Seat fitting advice and training for parents;
• Attendance at public events such as the Three Counties Show to promote road
safety;
• Road safety campaigns.
4.4.2.1 Schools
Resources have been allocated to ensure that a dedicated Road Safety Officer is
available to undertake school visits in all schools in each of the six District areas
within the County. These officers are locally based to minimise time wasted
travelling, and strong links are built up with individual schools. A full range of
road safety training is available, using locally and nationally produced material,
and there is a strong focus on:
146

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Pedestrian training and roadcraft – especially crossing the road
• Cycle proficiency training
• Evacuation of a coach / minibus in case of emergency
• Driver training for younger drivers (in High Schools)
Innovative techniques are used to seek to get the road safety message across to the
children in as interesting a way as possible. These include the use of Robee the
Robot, which is a remote-controlled model car and driver that can speak to the
children (voiced by a Road Safety officer via a radio link). In 2006, only two of these
robots were in use across the country, but feedback received from schools has
illustrated its success in grabbing the attention of the children.
In addition, school theatre tours are used to drive home the road safety message, as
well as other performance artists such as a magician. These can be more effective
at promoting road safety by bringing an extra dimension to the event for the children.
Promotional videos have been produced by the County Council, and these are
marketed nationally as well as being distributed to local schools. Close working with
the School Travel Plan officer takes place to co-ordinate activity within individual
schools, and in particular to identify opportunities for Walking Buses as a means to
promote safer walking to school. At present there are 37 Walking Buses operating
within the County serving 30 schools.
The School Crossing Patrol service is also an integral part of the Road Safety
team, and provides an invaluable role in ensuring that children can walk to school in
safety. Worcestershire was a major campaigner for the role of the SCP officers to be
extended so that they could assist other vulnerable members of the community, such
as the elderly, to cross the road as well, and the change in the law to permit this was
particularly welcomed.
Currently, there are approximately 130 School Crossing Patrol posts across
Worcestershire, although the nature of the job means that there are generally some
vacant posts. Innovative ways of recruiting people to these vacant posts have been
tried in various parts of the County, making maximum use of the local children and
parents to identify potential candidates for the posts from within the local community.
4.4.2.2 Driver Training
The County Council provides a range of driver training to people drawn from a
variety of sources. These include:
• County Council staff – driver training for those staff seeking to use pool
cars, lease cars, or drive minibuses on Council business
• Driver Improvement scheme – this scheme offers training targeted at
drivers convicted of certain driving offences, and offered the course to refresh
their driving skills
• Taxi Drivers – the Council undertakes assessments of taxi drivers on behalf
of District Councils and other authorities within the West Midlands, with the
aim of ensuring that the taxi drivers employed within the area are trained to
the same high standard.
147

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Other Groups – driver improvement training is also available to other groups
of people, such as younger drivers (generally those still at High School) and
elderly drivers. With an ageing population, one of the major road safety
challenges will be to ensure that elderly drivers are able to cope with modern
road conditions without causing an increasing safety problem.
In addition, driver training courses have also been held for a range of other groups,
such as Young Offenders and even groups of students from the Blind College in
Worcester, when blind people were given driving experience on the former runways
at Throckmorton Airfield near Pershore.
4.4.2.3 Promotions and Publicity
The County Council will also undertaken road safety campaigns in partnerships with
a wide range of organisations, notably the West Mercia Constabulary and the
Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Service. This joint working will be
developed further during the LTP2 period.
Attendance at specific events to promote road safety, or general health and safety
issues, is also a common feature of the work, and this includes demonstrating issues
such as the safe fitting of child car seats, evacuation of vehicles, impact of speeding,
and other road safety issues.
Events that are routinely covered by the Road Safety team include:
• Three Counties Show – major agricultural show at the Three Counties
Showground near Malvern, which is well attended by the public and lasts three
days. Other events at the Showground in Spring and Autumn are also often
covered.
• Skills on Show – a major event held at County Hall, Worcester showcasing
Worcestershire skills.
• Young Citizens Event, Trimpley Reservoir, near Kidderminster – an event to
promote safety in various areas of life to younger people.
Policy RS4: To provide road safety education and training at all schools
and colleges within Worcestershire, and to work with other public and
private sector organisations to promote road safety.
Policy RS5: To provide driver training and assessment schemes for County
Council staff and for external organisations, including taxi drivers.
4.4.3 Speed Management
4.4.3.1 Speed Limits
The Village Speeds Initiative introduced during the first LTP period achieved its
aim of reducing vehicle speeds within these communities, with monitoring
showing an average 6% reduction in speeds.
However, the outcome of the Initiative has been a lack in consistency in the
speed limit that applies in similar villages at different parts of the County, or on
different routes. Often a motorist will encounter a 30 mph limit in one village, and
148

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
a 40mph in the next, where these villages and the road layout may show vary
little difference otherwise. Therefore, within LTP2 there will be a review of all
County speed limits, and where appropriate changes will be made. These limits
will be backed by appropriate engineering measures to ensure that the road
layout reflects the target speed at each location.
LTP2 consultation has highlighted strong support for the introduction of 20 mph
speed limits outside schools and in town centres. To date there are relatively few
20 mph limits within Worcestershire, but it is intended that a programme of
introducing 20 mph at schools will be implemented within LTP2, where these
limits are identified to be necessary and can be introduced without compromising
the safety of all road users. A pilot project has been introduced in 2005 with
advisory 20 mph speed limits being introduced at 10 schools across the
Bromsgrove and Malvern Hills areas, and the outcome of this will be monitored
prior to roll-out of such limits elsewhere in the County.
Policy RS6: To undertake a review of all speed limits within the County to
ensure that a consistent approach is taken to the setting of limits, and that
driver’s are educated into driving at the appropriate speed for each limit.
Policy RS7: Introduce 20 m.p.h. speed limits outside schools across the
County where such a limit can be introduced without compromising overall
road safety for all road users.
Policy RS8:
Introduce 20 m.p.h. speed limits at other
locations across the County where pedestrian safety is a priority, such as
High Streets in town centres, where such a limit can be introduced without
compromising overall road safety.
4.4.3.2 West Mercia Safety Camera Partnership
Worcestershire is an active member of the West Mercia Safety Camera
Partnership, which has been operational since April 2003. The Partnership
embraces four local authorities, the Highways Agency, West Mercia
Constabulary, the Magistrates Courts Service, and six Primary Care Trusts. In
the first two years of operation, a 58.4% reduction in casualties (people killed or
seriously injured) was achieved at enforcement sites, with a 6% reduction in
average speed. 35% fewer vehicles exceeded the speed limit at enforcement
sites on average. These figures, derived from the Four Year Evaluation Report
for the National Safety Camera Programme (published by University College
London for the Department for Transport (DfT) in December 2005) compare
favourably with those recorded nationally.
Alongside the publication of the Four Year Evaluation Report, Government
announced changes to the way in which Safety Camera Partnerships will be
funded from 2007/08 onwards. The current arrangement whereby Partnerships
are funded directly from the DfT through the hypothecation of speeding fines will
be replaced after 2006/07 with a Road Safety planning guideline that will be
allocated to local highway authorities as a supplement to LTP2 funding.
Government has made it clear that the local highway authority has flexibility to
use this funding for measures that have the most effective impact on casualty
reduction. The guideline will be a mixture of revenue and capital funding.
149

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
It is clear that the West Mercia Safety Camera Partnership has, over the past
three years, made a significant contribution to casualty reduction across
Worcestershire, and therefore support for the Partnership’s work will continue
during the LTP2 period as one element of the Road Safety Strategy. Therefore,
the County Council will support the operation of the Safety Camera Partnership
for 2006/07 and 2007/08 with the aim of ensuring a minimum level of operation
comparable to 2005/06. This will require close working with other partner
agencies, especially the other highway authorities, to ensure that in 2007/08
adequate funding is available to support enforcement activity through the use of
the Road Safety planning guideline.
Arrangements for 2008/09 onwards will, however, be subject to a review of the
Safety Camera Partnership arrangements, with external pressures such as the
new funding arrangements, the proposed re-organisation of the police service,
and the re-organisation of the National Health Service all making this a good time
to carry out such a review. The police re-organisation is critical, as the
Government proposals could result in a merger between West Mercia
Constabulary and neighbouring police authorities, each of which has a separate
Safety Camera Partnership established. Therefore, it is proposed that the review
be completed during 2006/07, and that any changes to partnership arrangements
be introduced in 2008/09.
Policy RS9: Work with partners on the West Mercia Safety Camera
Partnership (and/or a successor Road Safety Partnership) to ensure that
speed enforcement activity is maintained across the County.
4.4.3.3 Speed Awareness Training
The County Council will seek to work towards the introduction of speed
awareness training for offenders as an alternative to speeding fines and penalty
points on a driver’s licence. The Association of Chief Police Officers has
published guidance on the most suitable form that a speed awareness
programme should take to ensure consistency across the country. The
introduction of such a scheme in Worcestershire will only take place through a
partnership with other organisations with road safety interests, and therefore the
route to introducing a scheme will be through close working with partners already
involved with the Safety Camera Partnership.
Policy RS10: Work with partners on the Safety Camera Partnership (and/or
a successor Road Safety Partnership) towards the development and
implementation of a Speed Awareness Course as part of the Partnership’s
activity.
4.4.4 Minor Schemes
During the first LTP period, a number of schemes have been proposed by local
communities that have failed to achieve LTP support as they fall between
different strategy areas. These schemes typically will meet a community need,
but never achieve a high enough priority to be implemented under a single
heading. For example, a scheme might tackle a casualty problem, and have
other community benefits, but because the casualty numbers are low, the
150

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
problem isn’t great enough at that location for the scheme to get funded from the
casualty reduction programme ahead of other sites with a worse casualty history.
To address this issue, it is proposed that LTP2 funding will be made available for
minor schemes that meet a local community need, but that would otherwise not
be funded from any individual strategy area. Such schemes will need to be
identified by a local community, and that community will generally be expected to
contribute a proportion of the scheme costs.
Typical schemes could include vehicle-activated signs, minor junction
improvements, minor traffic calming schemes, crossing points, and other minor
improvements. This approach will help ensure that real community needs are
addressed, and that community support for any scheme is achieved.
Policy RS11: Implement a programme of minor schemes that will tackle
local problems relating to congestion, safety, accessibility or air quality
identified by the local community but which are not a priority under these
individual strategy headings
151

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
152

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.5 AIR QUALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
153

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.5.1 Air Quality
Worcestershire is proud of its clean environment. There are only 3 Air Quality
Management Areas (AQMA) declared within the County, where traffic emissions
have been identified as the main contributory factor to the problem. These sites,
identified by District Council Environmental Health Departments through air
quality monitoring, are at:
• Welch Gate, Bewdley;
• A451 Horsefair, Kidderminster
• M42 Junction 1, north of Bromsgrove
In each case, the County Council has worked closely with the relevant District
Council (Wyre Forest and Bromsgrove) and other local partners to develop an
Action Plan, which would address the air quality problems by reducing vehicle
emissions. These Plans are described in greater detail within the relevant Area
Strategy (see Policies BROM3, WF1 and WF4).
However, it is clear that unless the impact of traffic growth and congestion in
Worcestershire’s urban areas is reduced, a number of additional sites, which are
currently borderline, are likely to exceed air quality thresholds. Hence, our air
quality strategy is intrinsically linked to the strategies already outlined to combat
congestion and improve accessibility by sustainable transport.
Policy AQ1: Implement the measures outlined in Policies BROM3, WF1 and
WF4 to achieve the removal of Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)
designation from the three existing sites identified.
Policy AQ2: Work with District Councils and other partners to ensure that
no new AQMA’s are declared during the LTP2 period as a result of
increasing traffic levels.
4.5.2 Worcestershire Climate Change Strategy
The Worcestershire Community Strategy contains a commitment to:
“develop a Climate Change Plan for the County that contributes towards
the national and international actions to tackle the causes and effects of
Climate Change”.
The aim is to provide an agreed framework to:
• Raise awareness of the issue of Climate Change
• Reduce Climate Change causing gas emissions across the County by 10% by
2010 and 20% by 2020.
• Assist adaptation to the impacts of Climate Change on the County.
154

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The transport sector is identified as one of four main sources of climate change
gas emissions, and LTP2 therefore has a key role to play in ensuring the success
of this strategy by:
• The implementation of a transport strategy that seeks to minimise car use by
providing realistic and attractive alternatives.
• Tackling congestion hotspots to secure freer flowing traffic and maximising
efficient use of fuel.
• Purchasing low emission vehicles or dual fuel vehicles for the County
Council’s own fleet.
• Encouraging public transport operators to purchase and operate low emission
vehicles and to secure a general modernisation of the public transport fleet
across the County.
Policy AQ3: Contribute towards the general improvement in air quality, and
towards meeting the targets set in the County’s Climate Change Strategy,
through the implementation of the LTP2 strategy.
4.5.3 Fleet Management / Fuel Policy
To complement the County Hall Travel Plan described earlier, the County Council
is developing a fuel policy that aims to contribute to local, national and global
environmental care. This will be achieved by:
• Minimising those adverse environmental impacts of transportation over which
it retains some influence, and
• Reducing harmful emissions and, particularly, greenhouse gases that
contribute to climate change.
155

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The areas of transportation that the Council can influence include:
• The Council’s own vehicle fleet,
• The business and commuter mileage incurred by its staff,
• Mileage incurred by children and staff attending schools or on school
business, and
• The mileage linked to council organised services and contractors.
With regard to the Council’s own fleet, 40 vehicles currently operate from the
main depot at Warndon, near Worcester. These vehicles, which comprise mobile
libraries, vans, light utility vehicles and mini-buses, travel approximately 500,000
miles each year, with fuel consumption amounting to around 25,000 gallons a
year.
The embodied energy of the products used by Worcestershire County Council
should also include an analysis of transport miles to inform procurement
decisions.
There are three main ways in which emissions can be reduced:
• Changing the fuel on which transport runs
• Increasing, technologically or manually, the fuel economy of vehicles
• Reducing the number of journeys undertaken
Phase II is addressed through vehicle procurement informed by the fuel strategy
and tempered by the requirements of service delivery and cost, and through the
training of drivers. Phase III is addressed through the Travel Plan.
The fuels assessed through the Fuel strategy include:- Petrol, Diesel, Liquified
Petroleum Gas (LPG), Compressed Natural Gas/ Liquified Natural Gas
(CNG/LNG), Hydrogen, Electric & Electric hybrid, Bio-diesel, Bio-ethanol, Water
Diesel Emulsion, Dimethyl Ether (DME), Methanol.
Therefore, the following policies will be adopted in relation to vehicle
procurement, fleet management and fuel policy.
Policy FP1: Worcestershire County Council will use Priority Fuels in its
vehicle fleet, which are chosen according to environmental performance,
their fitness-for-purpose, and cost.
Policy FP2: Worcestershire County Council will procure vehicles for its
vehicle fleet according to which manufacturers and models best fit the fuel
priorities and fitness-for-purpose within each vehicle category.
Policy FP3: To complement the environmental performance of its fuel
priorities, Worcestershire County Council will fit those emission control
technologies, which offer significant environmental benefits at a
reasonable cost.
156

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Policy FP4: Worcestershire County Council will continue to encourage the
uptake of the cleanest cars for its employees through its Company Car
Policy.
Policy FP5: Worcestershire County Council will endeavour to stay up to
speed with vehicle/fuel developments in technologies, costs and
availability. This will direct future actions and the policy will therefore be
reviewed every 4-5 years.
Policy FP6: Worcestershire County Council will encourage partner
organisations, including its contractors, and individuals to adopt the aims
and objectives of this policy on renewable fuel whenever possible and
practical
4.5.4 Strategic Environmental Assessment
The Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) undertaken for LTP2 has
assessed all policies in terms of potential environmental effects. It has been
prepared at the same time as the LTP2, and this section of the LTP2 outlines
how the implementation of individual schemes and strategies within LTP2 will
seek to meet the environmental objectives contained within the SEA.
The SEA objectives were developed following an extensive consultation process,
and are contained in detail within the SEA Environmental Report (this can be
viewed at www.worcestershire.gov.uk/ltp) and summarised within the
Environmental Statement (included as Appendix Two).
A major objective of the overall LTP2 strategy is to safeguard and improve
Worcestershire’s environment through a package of measures that seek to
reduce the impact of transportation upon the local and global environment.
These include the promotion of modal shift away from car dependency through
measures such as Travel Plans, improvement of passenger transport and better
walking and cycle networks. They also include better traffic management to
reduce traffic congestion, and accessibility planning to ensure that new
developments are located so as to minimise travel demand and car use. The
Asset Management Plan will also develop better maintenance techniques to
minimise the use of natural resources and promote recycling of materials where
possible. As part of the new Term Maintenance Contract which will operate
through the LTP2 period, it is proposed to introduce waste recycling works at the
highways depot at Hartlebury to allow processing of waste and re-use of old
material. This will require an investment of around £1 million, but it is estimated
that this sum would be saved over the LTP2 period.
It is recognised that investment in improved transport facilities will inevitably
result in some schemes that will have some form of environmental impact, and
where this is the case a full Environmental Impact Assessment will be required.
The design of new transport infrastructure will incorporate sustainable design
principles as a matter of course.
The following policies summarise how the County Council, through the LTP2
strategy, will seek to achieve the SEA objectives.
157

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Policy SEA1: Where new transport infrastructure is required to implement
the LTP2 strategy, schemes will be designed using sustainable design and
construction principles, and an Environmental Impact Assessment will be
produced for larger schemes.
Policy SEA2: Where transport schemes are implemented, every effort will be
made to meet the following environmental objectives:
• Maintain and enhance Worcestershire’s biodiversity, flora and fauna;
• Maintain and enhance landscape character;
• Protect and improve the water resource;
• Reduce flood risk;
• Maintain and improve air quality;
• Encourage energy efficiency and reduce contributions to climate change;
• Conserve and enhance the historic and cultural environment;
• Support the sustainable extraction, re-use and re-cycling of minerals and
aggregates;
• Encourage the re-cycling of waste and use of renewable resources;
• Minimise the impact of transport schemes upon the best and most versatile
agricultural land.
158

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Policy SEA3: The Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) will set out
how the County Council will seek to meet the environmental objectives
listed in Policy SEA2 when delivering highways maintenance works across
the County. Consultation will be undertaken with relevant organisations
when developing the TAMP to ensure that these objectives are met as
closely as possible.
4.5.5 Transport-related Noise
Transport activity results in noise from a variety of sources, including vehicle
engines, rail infrastructure and road surfaces, and from aircraft. It is recognised
that this noise can be a concern for local communities, and that background
noise from major transport corridors can be a nuisance.
The County Council will seek to minimise the impact of transport-related noise
through a number of measures, including:
• Ensuring that transportation projects promoted through the Local Transport
Plan are fully assessed for their noise impact as part of the Environmental
Impact Assessment required under Policy SEA1.
• Working with other partners in the rail and freight industries to ensure that
noise from rail and freight activities, such as deliveries to industrial or retail
centres, is kept to an acceptable level to minimise the impact upon local
communities.
• Through the Transport Asset Management Plan, opportunities will be taken to
introduce road surfaces that minimise the amount of vehicle noise at locations
where noisy surfaces are identified as a problem as part of the routine
highway maintenance programme.
• Ensuring that new transportation projects are designed to minimise or reduce
the impact of transport-related noise upon local communities.
Policy NOI1: The County Council will seek to ensure that the impact of
transport-related noise on local communities is minimised by:
Ensuring that new transport infrastructure is designed to minimise the
impact of transport-related noise, and where possible reduces such impact
on local communities;
Working with partners on relevant Fora, such as the Freight Quality
Partnership, to reduce the impact of noise from various areas of transport
activity.
Introducing road surfaces that reduce traffic noise where appropriate
through the Transport Asset Management Plan;
159

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
160

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.6 AREA STRATEGIES - BROMSGROVE
161

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Summary of Key Issues
Within Bromsgrove the major emphasis within LTP2 will be the improvement of
passenger transport facilities within the town itself, and the need to reduce traffic
on the congested A38 route linking Bromsgrove with the M42 and Birmingham.
Improvements to the Bromsgrove – Birmingham rail corridor will be essential to
ensure that an attractive alternative exists for people currently travelling to
Birmingham by car.
Modal shift on this corridor will also be essential to reduce the level of traffic
passing through the declared Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) at Lickey,
based on the M42 Junction 1. This will require partnership working with the
District Council and the Highways Agency.
Re-development of the Longbridge works, following the closure of MG Rover, will
also result in transportation pressures in the northern part of the District,
particularly revolving around the need to improve accessibility between the
Longbridge site and the M42 east, to ensure that the site is an attractive location
for new employers. This is a key employment site for Bromsgrove residents, with
several hundred having been formerly employed at MG Rover, and the
transportation impact of re-development in this area will certainly affect the
District.
4.6.1 Bromsgrove Town Centre
In 2004 Bromsgrove District Council led a review of the town centre to identify
problems and opportunities to improve the centre. Following an extensive
consultation, including workshops and town centre audits, three main priorities for
improving the town centre environment were identified.
One of these is the improvement of the Bus Station, which lies between the High
Street and the main town centre supermarket, and is therefore ideally situated to
meet local needs. During 2005, a scheme was completed to improve pedestrian
routes linking the High Street, the bus station and a major supermarket, but
further work remains to be done to improve bus stop facilities in the town centre.
The existing bus station consists of four bus shelters, and there is a clear
opportunity to improve passenger facilities to provide a clear focal point for bus
journeys within the town. The objective will be to provide better facilities,
improved accessibility for all users, and better passenger information and
integration with other modes of travel. LTP2 funding from the Integrated
Passenger Transport budget will be directed to this scheme as part of wider
passenger transport improvements in this area of the County.
Another area where the need for enhancement was highlighted was within the
pedestrianised High Street. Opportunities for improving the High Street
environment will be investigated in liaison with the District and Town Councils,
but the availability of LTP2 funding from the Structural Maintenance budget will
be dependent upon competing priorities and it can be anticipated that a high level
of partnership funding would be required to develop a scheme.
162

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Another concern raised was congestion problems arising from east-west traffic
movements across the town centre. At present, there are no plans for any new
road infrastructure within the town centres, although this will be reviewed should
any re-development proposals come forward during the LTP2 period.
Policy BROM1: Work with partners to identify and implement improvements
to Bromsgrove Bus Station as part of an overall town centre enhancement
project.
4.6.2 Bromsgrove Railway Station
The railway station is located on the Birmingham – Bristol main line at the eastern
edge of Bromsgrove. Whilst existing and new residential developments are
within walking distance of the station, and the Bromsgrove Technology Park (a
key site within the Central Technology Belt) is being developed just to the south
of the station, the station is poorly located to serve the town centre, and bus
interchange facilities are poor.
In 2003 a new car park was opened at the station as a result of a partnership
between County, District and rail industry companies. This 50 space facility is
well used, but overflow parking still occurs on surrounding streets and passenger
facilities at the station are limited. There is no booking office, the station is
unstaffed, there is no disabled access to the eastern platform, and the rail service
is constrained by the short platforms, which limit the type of rolling stock that can
be used. Integration with bus services is poor, and surveys undertaken in 2002
indicate that 60% of rail users drive or are dropped off by car, 29% walk, and 8%
take a taxi. Few people cycle or use the bus to reach the station.
Despite these constraints, the number of passengers using the station increased
fourfold between 1994 and 2005, with 309,634 passenger journeys being
recorded in 2005.
The Bromsgrove – Birmingham corridor is the largest travel to work corridor
within Worcestershire, and with the parallel A38 route being congested the
potential for generating additional rail travel is clear. The identified development
sites along the Central Technology Belt are mostly located near to railway
stations on the Malvern – Worcester – Bromsgrove – Birmingham route, and
therefore opportunities exist for promoting travel to these sites by rail.
It is clear that capacity constraints elsewhere on the rail route into Birmingham
will in the short-term prevent new rail services being provided, and therefore any
increase in passenger capacity will need to be in the form of longer trains. At
Bromsgrove this will require platform lengthening works to be undertaken.
This aspiration is recognised in the Route Utilisation Strategy for the West
Midlands (WMRUS) published in August 2005, and there is obvious potential for
a partnership project that will pool local authority and rail industry resources to
deliver improvements at Bromsgrove Railway Station. The package of measures
would comprise:
163

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Lengthening the platforms to accommodate longer trains thereby providing
additional passenger capacity on services to / from Birmingham – the
feasibility of this has been confirmed by a Network Rail study and the scheme
could proceed subject to funding being confirmed.
• Providing additional car parking on the former oil terminal site next to the
station. This is currently leased from Network Rail to the freight operator
EWS, but no freight operations are being undertaken at present. The site has
been the subject of discussions on re-development, and any such proposals
would need to include an element of car parking for the station. The provision
of a booking office / waiting room to improve passenger facilities and to allow
staffing of the station. This would improve passenger security as well as
access to information and the ability to purchase tickets. A building was
designed by Central Trains but has not been constructed due to lack of
funding.
• The improvement of accessibility, particularly disabled access to the
eastern platform. At present, access is via a stepped footbridge and is not
suitable for use by people with poor mobility. Solutions could include a
ramped footbridge, a ramped footpath onto St Godwalds Road, or a
pedestrian crossing point across the tracks (which would only be permissible
if the station were staffed).
• Bus interchange facilities need to be improved, as buses are unable to turn
within the station forecourt. This could be tackled through the provision of an
improved bus turning point within the oil terminal site, as part of the car
parking improvements highlighted above.
These improvements will only be possible through a partnership with Network
Rail, the relevant Train Operating Company (currently Central trains, but the
franchise will be re-structured during the LTP2 period), EWS, the District Council,
and local bus operators, with LTP2 funding being used to support implementation
of the package.
Policy BROM2: Work with rail industry partners to secure a package of
improvements at Bromsgrove Railway Station.
4.6.3 M42 Junction 1
Traffic congestion at this junction has contributed to the declaration of an Air
Quality Management Area covering the surrounding residential area. The A38
between Bromsgrove and this motorway junction has also been identified as one
of the most heavily congested routes within the County, with an average daily
traffic flow of 30,900 vehicles between Bromsgrove and the M42.
Whilst it is intended to reduce the traffic pressures at this location through
investment in the parallel rail corridor, it is recognised that traffic management
measures will need to be introduced at this junction to reduce congestion, and
therefore reduce vehicle emissions.
Policy BROM3: The County Council will work with the Highways Agency
and Bromsgrove District Council to identify the most appropriate strategy
to allow removal of the AQMA designation at M42 Junction 1.
164

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.6.4 Longbridge
Even before the closure of the MG Rover factory in 2005, large areas of the
Longbridge site had been identified for re-development. The closure has made
re-development an even higher priority. Whilst most of the site is physically
located within Birmingham, the southern part of the Works is within Bromsgrove
District, and the works previously employed many people from Worcestershire,
generating significant travel demand through the Bromsgrove area.
The improvement of access between the Longbridge area and the M42 at
Junction 2 has been identified as a priority in previous studies, notably the West
Midlands Area Multi-Modal Study (WMAMMS), which investigated travel demand
across the west Midlands conurbation and was published in 2002. Central
Government previously allocated funding to support the implementation of
schemes identified through WMAMMS.
A feasibility study was completed in 2005 investigating options for the
improvement of road access between Longbridge and M42 Junction 1. The
study, commissioned by a partnership including the County and District Councils,
Birmingham City Council, AWM, MG Rover, Centro and the Highways Agency
also considered the implications of Centro proposals for a strategic Park and
Ride site at Longbridge Station, as well as railfreight options at Longbridge.
The study considered a range of options for improving access, ranging from
widening existing routes to new roads linking the A441 at Hopwood with the
B4096 at Longbridge. It concluded that no single option stood out as being
significantly better than any other, with a critical issue being achieving a balance
between the environmental impact upon Longbridge residents and the
environmental impact upon the North Worcestershire countryside.
Further work is obviously needed on this issue, and the County Council will not
be able to support a new road corridor until more detailed examination of options
has been carried out. The need to improve strategic road access to the
Longbridge area is, however, acknowledged.
In addition, the impact of a new Link Road upon the traffic flows at M42 Junction
1 should be investigated in further detail, as a reduction in traffic at this location
could assist with the improvement of air quality at that site in accordance with the
policy outlined above.
Policy BROM4: Work with partners including Birmingham City Council and
Bromsgrove District Council to identify the appropriate transport strategy
to improve strategic accessibility to the Longbridge area without having a
significant environmental impact upon North Worcestershire.
165

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
166

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.7 AREA STRATEGIES – MALVERN HILLS
167

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Summary of Key Issues
The Malvern Hills District forms the western boundary of Worcestershire, and is a
particularly rural part of the County. Accessibility is the key transport issue for
this area of the County, as highlighted by the Local Strategic Partnership (Vision
21) and Malvern Hills District Council’s corporate plan. The issue of accessibility
manifests itself in the following ways:
• Access to facilities in the market towns and main centres for residents of rural
villages
• Strategic access from the main town of Malvern to the national road and rail
networks.
The strategic access to and from Malvern is particularly affected by congestion at
the river crossings in Worcester, as well as the limited capacity of the Malvern –
Worcester railway.
4.7.1 Malvern
Malvern itself marks the southern end of the Central Technology Belt, due largely
to the existing high technology industries located in the town building on the
heritage of the former Ministry of Defence research facilities. One of the main
constraints to further development of these facilities is poor access to the M5
motorway and to national rail services. Hence, the delivery of the transport
strategy outlined for Worcester is of equal importance to the ability of Malvern to
meet the RSS role as part of the Central technology Belt.
Two main re-development proposals during the LTP2 period are the further
development of the Malvern Science and Technology Park, and the proposed
mixed use development at the DERA North site in Malvern Link. In both cases, a
package of transport improvements comprising junction improvements,
pedestrian and cycle facilities, bus service enhancements and Travel Plans have
been identified to permit the travel demand generated by these developments to
be accommodated. These packages will be developer funded, with AWM
support in the case of the Malvern Science and Technology Park.
Further phases of development at the Malvern Science and Technology Park are
likely in future years as part of the Central Technology Belt implementation. The
transport implications of this will need careful consideration, and a Malvern
Transportation Study is likely to be required to identify the appropriate transport
strategy. The package of improvements already identified is unlikely to be
sufficient to allow full re-development of the site.
The District and Town Councils have also identified a need for enhancement
within Malvern town centre, and a previous study undertaken in 1996 investigated
traffic management options including pedestrianisation of Church Street and oneway
systems. Identifying a suitable traffic management package is made more
difficult within Malvern due to the local topography, which means that east-west
routes across the town centre are limited and the ability to undertake junction
improvements is constrained. Previous work will be reviewed and minor traffic
management measures within Malvern town centre will be considered as part of
LTP2.
168

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Access to the Three Counties Showground has been highlighted in the LTP2
consultation process as a significant local issue, with concern that increasing
numbers of major events held at the site will result in greater traffic problems on
the surrounding highway network. This needs to be balanced with a desire to
maximise the economic benefit that the local area can gain from increased
tourism and visitor numbers resulting from the wider use of the Showground.
The County Council will work with the District Council, Police and the
Showground to identify appropriate traffic management measures which could
allow the Showground to develop in an organic manner with minimal impact on
the local communities. This would include looking at improved public transport
connections to the site, and initiatives such as joint ticketing with public transport
operators.
Policy MH1:To support the improvement of access to the major
development sites within Malvern to allow it to fulfil its role as a key node
on the Central Technology Belt.
Policy MH2:To support the enhancement of Malvern town centre through
the implementation of appropriate traffic management measures.
4.7.1.1 Malvern Railway Stations
There are two railway stations within Malvern, Great Malvern and Malvern Link.
These offer services to Hereford, Worcester, Birmingham and London. There is
currently limited car parking at both stations, and this is a constraint on the
potential for these to operate as strategic park and ride sites for travel to
Worcester and Birmingham. Despite this, both stations saw significant growth in
passenger numbers between 1994 and 2005, with patronage at Great Malvern
increasing by 43% and Malvern Link by 44%. A total of 613,016 passengers
used the two stations in 2005, with two-thirds of this using Great Malvern.
Opportunities exist to improve parking facilities, particularly at Malvern Link where
a substantial area is available to the north of the station, and the County Council
will work with Network Rail and the relevant Train Operating Companies to
improve car parking capacity.
Improvements to bus stop facilities are in hand at Great Malvern station, but
further opportunities will be taken to improve interchange facilities at both
stations. The commitment to extend the staffing coverage at Great Malvern
station as part of the SRA Railways for All strategy, which has been published in
draft, is also welcomed.
Policy MH3:To work with rail industry partners to identify and implement
improvements to Great Malvern and Malvern Link stations, especially
through the improvement of car parking facilities at Malvern Link.
169

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.7.2 Tenbury Wells Area
The north-western part of Malvern Hills District is extremely rural, a fact that is
recognised through the area’s inclusion in the Rural Regeneration Zone. Malvern
itself plays relatively little role in the provision of day to day services for residents
of this area, with communities such as Kidderminster, Leominster and Ludlow
being of far more importance.
Tenbury Wells itself is a market town providing some local facilities, including a
hospital, but the provision of transport services in this area is complicated by the
complexity of local authority boundaries in this area.
The LTP2 consultation highlighted the provision of bus services to improve
accessibility as a key local concern. Whilst improvements in bus services
connecting Tenbury and neighbouring villages to Worcester and Kidderminster
have been made in recent years, cross-boundary services providing access to
Leominster, Ludlow and Hereford are poor. Accessibility mapping will be used to
investigate this issue further, and the Accessibility Strategy will identify specific
problems and solutions. This work will be undertaken in partnership with
Herefordshire and Shropshire County Councils.
Tenbury itself will be included within the Market Towns Transportation Initiative,
and consideration will be given to implementing transport improvements as part
of any future town centre enhancement proposals.
Policy MH4:To work with partners including Herefordshire and Shropshire
County Councils to improve passenger transport links between Tenbury
and neighbouring destinations, using accessibility mapping to identify
major opportunities for service enhancements.
4.7.3 Upton-upon-Severn Area
Upton-upon-Severn is the main market town for South-western Worcestershire,
and as with the Tenbury area, accessibility mapping will be used to identify
problems that local communities have in accessing the facilities available in
Upton, Malvern and other main centres. This work will require cross-boundary
working with Gloucestershire and Herefordshire County Councils.
The County Council is also working with District and Town Council partners to
identify transportation improvements within Upton that will enhancement the town
centre and improve its attractiveness as a tourism destination. The main areas of
attention are on the Riverside and the High Street, and LTP2 funding from the
Market Towns Transportation Initiative will be used to contribute towards
implementation costs for any resulting scheme.
Policy MH5:To work with partners to identify and implement transport
measures that will support town centre enhancement schemes within
Upton-upon-Severn.
170

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.7.4 Malvern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
The Malvern Hills AONB covers part of South-west Worcestershire, notably the
Malvern Hills themselves, but extending both north and south from the Hills to
cover the outlying areas. The AONB area includes a substantial part of Eastern
Herefordshire as well as Worcestershire. The impact of traffic on local
communities particularly focussed on the Hills themselves is a major issue, and
the AONB Management Board wish to promote more sustainable travel to the
Hills. The Malvern Hills Hopper bus service is in place to provide public transport
access to the Hills, with connections to rail services at Great Malvern railway
station. Car park management is also a key issue locally, and potential for
operating Park and Ride services at busiest times from remote car parks, such as
the Three Counties Showground, are options that could be explored.
Policy MH7:To support measures to minimise the impact of traffic upon
local communities within the Malvern Hills AONB area.
171

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
172

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.8 AREA STRATEGIES - REDDITCH
173

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Summary of Key Issues
Redditch, located in the north of the county, has relatively few problems relating
to traffic congestion or air quality, which is in large part due to the highway
network within the town being developed as part of the New Town expansion
from the 1960’s. However, accessibility can be a problem in some areas of the
town, despite a reasonable bus network, and there are significant community
safety concerns regarding use of the footpath and subways network.
There is a proposal for a major commercial leisure development at Abbey
Stadium, to the north of the town, which has significant transport implications.
This was the subject of a Public Inquiry in November 2005, and if planning
approval is granted it is likely to be built during the LTP2 period. This
development would have a major impact on travel patterns within Redditch, as
detailed below.
A Bus Quality Partnership has been established within the town, and this has
successfully secured funding for investment in public transport facilities within the
town. Rail access to the town is via a single-track line from Barnt Green. Whilst
a reasonable service is provided from Redditch to Birmingham as part of the
Cross-city line, interchange with rail services to other parts of the County are
poor.
The main concern over traffic congestion relates to the highway network in the
south-eastern area of Redditch, and the confirmation that the A435 (T) Studley
Bypass will not go ahead means that alternative solutions to such congestion will
need to be identified.
4.8.1 Redditch Bus Quality Partnership
This partnership was established in 2003 and has successfully secured Urban
Bus Challenge funding worth £988,000 for a series of bus service improvements
within the town. The Bus Challenge project, “Step Change in Redditch”, is
intended to bring about a step change in the way people think of public transport
in the town, and has been supported by the purchase of 19 accessible buses by
First Group to operate on the improved services within the town.
Total project costs are £3.593 million, and LTP funding of £950,000 has been
allocated to support the scheme. The majority of this funding was provided in the
first LTP period, although some LTP2 funding will be set aside to support further
BQP projects in the town beyond 2006.
Accessibility mapping for the town will be used to highlight further opportunities
for the BQP to improve bus services, community transport, and bus infrastructure
within the town.
Policy RED1: To support the implementation of bus infrastructure
improvements identified through the Redditch Bus Quality Partnership.
174

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.8.2 Abbey Stadium Development
Redditch Borough Council has entered into a public / private sector partnership to
re-develop the existing Abbey Stadium facility into a major commercial leisure
complex. The scale of the development makes it a proposal of regional
significance, and although the Borough Council has resolved that it is minded to
grant outline planning approval, the application has been called in by the
Secretary of State. A Public Inquiry was held in Autumn 2005 and a decision on
the development is due in Spring 2006.
If the proposal ultimately secures planning approval, it is programmed for
construction during the LTP2 period. The Transportation Assessment for the
development identified the impact of the additional travel demand upon the local
highway network, and following discussions with the County Council and the
Highways Agency the following transport strategy was agreed:
• Construction of the A441 Bordesley Bypass along with associated junction
improvements on the A441 at the Riverside Roundabout in Redditch, and at
the M42 Junction 2.
• Development and implementation of a comprehensive site Travel Plan,
including improvements to the local walking and cycling networks to provide
direct access between the site and surrounding residential areas, the town
centre (including bus and rail stations), and the National Cycle Network. Bus
services including a shuttle bus between the site and the town centre would
also be provided.
• Introduction of traffic management measures on the Bypassed section of
the existing A441 through Bordesley village, to deter through traffic, improve
conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, and to improve facilities for bus
passengers.
If the development goes ahead, this package would be primarily funded by a
partnership of Redditch Borough Council and the developer. Although the A441
Bordesley Bypass is a recognised new road proposal within the County Council
Structure Plan, it is not a scheme of regional significance, and under current
traffic conditions is not considered a priority for the County Council. However, the
County Council has agreed to make a contribution of up to £1 million towards the
construction costs of the Bypass to ensure that the road is built to a dual
carriageway standard as this is considered the most appropriate and safest
standard of road for the forecast traffic flows.
Policy RED2: To support the implementation of the agreed transport
strategy for North Redditch should the Abbey Stadium re-development
proposals gain planning approval during the LTP2 period, including a
contribution towards the Bordesley Bypass element of the package from
the LTP2 budget.
4.8.3 Community Safety Strategy
The Redditch Community Safety Partnership has published a strategy for 2005-
08 that highlights major concern over the safety of the town’s subways and
footpath network. In particular, problems with anti-social behaviour are identified
175

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
as a deterrent to the use of the network, and as a barrier to promoting walking
and cycling within the town.
As a new town, Redditch has an extensive segregated footpath network, and this
is a feature that should be used to encourage walking within the town. In
addition, this network could form the basis of a segregated cyclepath network if
relevant Traffic Regulation Orders were put in place, and this will be investigated
as part of the LTP2 strategy. Therefore, in LTP2 it is proposed that the County
Council will work with the Redditch Community Safety Partnership to identify
opportunities to improve the network and to ensure that people feel safer using it.
In addition, the County Council will work with the Borough Council and the
Community Safety Partnership to undertake a programme of Estate Roads
enhancements aimed at ensuring that the footpath and footway network is safe
for all road users, including those who are less mobile.
Policy RED3: To work with the Redditch Community Safety Partnership to
identify opportunities to improve the footpath and subway networks within
Redditch aimed at making people feel safer when using the network.
4.8.4 A435 Studley Bypass
It is clear that the previously identified Studley Bypass proposal, which was
promoted by the Highways Agency in 1993, is now no longer a national or
regional priority. An element of this scheme was the provision of improved road
connections from the Bypass to the A441 in Redditch, which would have
removed traffic from various communities in South-east Redditch. The Highways
Agency has, following a Public Inquiry in 2004, gained approval for its decision to
revoke the Line Orders for this scheme.
The County Council supports Warwickshire County Council in its desire to
improve the A435, and will work with Warwickshire and the Highways Agency to
identify an appropriate transport strategy to minimise the impact of traffic on
South-east Redditch and communities in Warwickshire.
Policy RED4: To work with Warwickshire County Council and the Highways
Agency to identify the appropriate transport strategy that will minimise the
impact of traffic on the environment of South-east Redditch and the
neighbouring communities within Warwickshire.
176

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.9 AREA STRATEGIES - WORCESTER
177

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Summary of Key Issues
The city of Worcester will be a major focus for investment in transport
infrastructure during the LTP2 period, reflecting the significant transport
constraints that exist within the city and the development pressures that are
forecast to occur. In addition, the Sustainable Travel Town project and Project
Express Initiatives will require support through investment in better transport
facilities.
The constrained local transport network presents real problems in allowing the
city to reach its full potential as a place to live in, work in and to visit for shopping
or leisure purposes. A major constraint is the River Severn, which runs northsouth
through the city and over which there are only three crossing points, these
being:
• A44 Worcester Bridge – the major road crossing within the city centre,
carrying 44,000 vehicles a day.
• A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road – constructed in 1988, the traffic flow
on this single carriageway road (33,000 vehicles per day), far exceeds its
capacity (18,000 vehicles per day).
• Sabrina Bridge – a bridge for pedestrians and cyclists within the city centre,
which forms a vital link to the existing University of Worcester (UoW) campus
in the Henwick area of the city.
During the LTP2 period, UoW will undergo a major expansion, with the opening
of a new city centre campus on the former Hospital site at Castle Street. This site
is extremely well located in terms of access to public transport facilities such as
Foregate Street railway station and Crown Gate Bus Station, but the expansion
will certainly create additional travel demand. The total number of students
attending UoW is expected to increase from the current 8,000 to 12,000 by
2010/11.
In addition, proposed residential developments at Diglis Basin and at the
Worcester Porcelain factory site may result in around 1,000 new homes being
built in the area of Worcester immediately to the south of the city centre during
the LTP2 period. Along with planned employment sites at Worcester Woods (on
the eastern edge of the city) and at Grove Farm (to the west), it is clear that the
existing pressures on the transport network will increase further during the LTP2
period.
Looking to the longer term, a partial review of RSS is underway to examine the
implications for the city of the identified sub-regional role for 2011 and beyond.
This will require a major land use and transportation study, and will involve
transportation modelling to identify the most sustainable ways in which the growth
of Worcester can be accommodated. This work commenced in 2005 and is due
to be completed during 2006 to fit with the timetable for submitting he completed
RSS Review to central Government.
The outcome of this study will be the identification of the transport strategy for
Worcester for LTP3 (2011-2016) and it is likely that this will require significant
investment. Therefore, it is anticipated that a Major Scheme funding bid will be
developed during the LTP2 period for the Worcester Transport Strategy.
178

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.9.1 Worcester Sustainable Travel Town
Following a rigorous bidding process, Worcester was selected by DfT as one of
three demonstration projects across England to participate in the Sustainable
Travel Town Initiative. A total of £3.5 million was awarded to the County Council
to implement the project over a five-year period running through to 2008/09.
The award, which takes the form of revenue funding, will allow the authority,
working in partnership with the City Council, local public transport operators, the
South Worcestershire Primary Care Trust (SWPCT), and other partners, to trial a
package of measures aimed at achieving a significant shift to sustainable travel
modes for journeys made within the city.
The main elements of the project are:
• Personalised Travel Planning project covering 60% of the cities’ households;
• Development of Employer and School Travel Plans at all major employers
and for all schools and further education establishments within the city.
• A comprehensive range of marketing initiatives to promote walking, cycling
and public transport.
• A joint project with Worcester University and SWPCT to promote the health
benefits of people adopting more sustainable modes of travel.
• The introduction of a city car club serving Worcester.
• To share best practice with the other two Sustainable Travel Town projects (in
Darlington and Peterborough) and to disseminate this best practice
information to other authorities across the country.
The project commenced in 2004/05 with the recruitment of the project team and
the undertaking of travel behaviour research. The latter, completed in early 2005,
gives comprehensive information on local travel patterns based on 4,125
household travel behaviour surveys and 400 additional interviews covering
perceptions and attitudes and potential for behaviour change.
This research has indicated that leisure (28%), work (22%), and shopping (22%)
are the main reasons for making a journey, with work journeys assuming a
greater importance on weekdays and leisure journeys and shopping at
weekends.
Motorised modes account for two-thirds of all trips, and a quarter of trips are
made on foot. Public transport (6%) and cycling (3%) are lower, even though
179

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Worcester has a reasonably comprehensive bus and cycle network in parts of the
city.
The research also indicates that sustainable transport modes are more likely to
be adopted by younger people, and those not employed. Employed people are
more likely to use the car (although there is a willingness to change behaviour.)
70% of all trips are less than 5 km long, and the car remains a significant mode of
travel for short trips, with 60% of trips made within the city (rather than to / from
destinations outside the city) being made by car. These are the trips that need to
be targeted to encourage modal shift to sustainable modes, and the research
estimates that 46% of journeys made by car within Worcester have a viable
sustainable travel alternative.
When people’s perceptions are considered, 91% favoured making sustainable
transport modes a priority in transport planning, but around half did not have
sufficient information about public transport services, and the main barrier to
mode shift was the perception that walking and cycling would take longer than
the car.
It is clear from this survey evidence that there is much work to be done to
promote sustainable travel within Worcester and encourage behaviour change.
The Sustainable Travel Town project will continue until 2008/09 using the DfT
grant. It is intended that successful elements of the project will continue beyond
that date funded by the partners and through developer contributions. The
project team will work with the developers of new housing and employment sites
within Worcester to ensure that the project helps meet the travel needs of new
developments as well as the existing community.
The project team have already established a close working relationship with the
other two Sustainable Travel Town projects in Darlington and Peterborough, and
a number of joint events have already been held to share best practice with other
local highway authorities. These include:
• Sustainable Travel Town Annual Conferences
• A programme of mode by mode seminars in each of the three towns
• Study Tour of best practice infrastructure in Germany
180

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The national walking charity, Living Streets, has been commissioned to
undertake a strategic review of walking in Worcester to identify key issues,
opportunities and ideas for action. Initial research and fieldwork took place in
early 2006, and initial findings include:
• Space – opportunities exist to allocate more space to pedestrians without
adversely impacting on traffic movement.
• Safety – signage can be improved to aid navigation, but also to reduce street
crime and aid emergency services.
• Comfort – an innovative approach to seating could provide resting places for
older walkers when they shop, without these seats becoming a focus for
disruptive behaviour after dark.
• Permeability – with detailed local consultation and close working with land use
developers, new pedestrian routes can be created where areas of the city are
re-developed.
• Legibility – poor conditions for intuitive navigation are limiting pedestrian
movement, especially in the city centre.
In addition, during 2006 Community Street Audits will be undertaken in areas of
Worcester that have previously participated in the Personalised Travel Planning
programme, notably the Warndon area, to engage the local community in the
identification of improvements to their neighbourhood shopping centres.
LTP2 funding will be used to help ensure that the walking, cycling and public
transport facilities that are required to overcome the barriers identified in the
surveys, in particular by filling gaps in the walk / cycle networks, are provided. Of
particular importance will be ensuring that maintenance works on footways
includes improvements to pedestrian facilities as well as simply being focused on
the re-surfacing of the asset.
Policy WOR1: To continue implementation of the Sustainable Travel Town
project, to improve walking, cycling and public transport infrastructure to
support the project, to share experience gained from the project with other
local highway authorities, and to apply the best practice measures
identified through the project throughout Worcestershire.
4.9.2 Project Express
Overview
In Worcester the Project Express proposals centre around the development of a
series of interchange hubs around the city aimed at encouraging car users to
switch to passenger transport to access the city centre and other key destinations
such as the Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Shire Business Park, County Hall, the
University and library and railway stations.
During the first LTP period, Worcester’s first Park and Ride site was opened in the
northern part of the city at Perdiswell. Patronage of this site has grown year on year,
and in 2004/05 it was used by an average of 2,323 people per week.
In September 2005, major improvements were made to the Park and Ride services
with the introduction of new express bus services from the Perdiswell Transport
181

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Interchange connecting to areas in North Worcester, including the employment and
residential areas of Warndon, and the Royal Worcestershire Hospital. These
services have greatly increased the number of destinations that can be accessed
using the Park and Ride facility, and patronage and revenue has grown to reflect this.
The graph below shows the increase in revenue in comparison with the two previous
years operations over the September to December period.
BUS PASSENGER JOURNEYS ON 'W' ROUTES
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
2004/5
2005/6
5000
0
15-Jan
8-Jan
1-Jan
25-Dec
18-Dec
11-Dec
4-Dec
27-Nov
20-Nov
13-Nov
6-Nov
30-Oct
23-Oct
16-Oct
9-Oct
2-Oct
25-Sep
18-Sep
11-Sep
During the LTP2 period the expansion of Project Express in Worcester will centre
around the development of a series of interchange hubs around the city aimed at
encouraging car users to switch to passenger transport to access the city centre
and other key destinations such as the Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Shire
Business Park, County Hall, the University and library and railway stations. The
proposed phasing is summarised below.
• Phase 1 (September 2006-2008) - Worcestershire Royal Hospital weekend
Transport Interchange (using the staff car park) added to network. Worcester
Rugby Club Transport Interchange added to network with direct and frequent
(10 minutes) services to Perdiswell Transport Interchange via Shires
Business Park, Worcestershire Royal Hospital (weekend use as Car Park),
City Centre, railway stations, with a link to County Hall and Spetchley Road
Education Sites.
• Phase 2 (2008-2010) - Proposed West Worcester Transport Interchange
implemented with direct and frequent (10 minutes) services to Worcester
Rugby Club Transport Interchange, St Johns area, City Centre, railway
stations, Worcestershire Royal Hospital and Shires Business Park.
• Phase 3 (2010 – 2011) - Proposed Transport Interchange at Whittington/M5
Junction 7 (including car and coach parking) implemented with direct and
frequent (10 minutes) services to Perdiswell Transport Interchange via
Worcestershire Royal Hospital, railway stations and the City Centre, with a
link to County Hall and Spetchley Road Education Sites.
The bus priority and car park infrastructure work for Phases 2 and 3 would
precede the implementation of the new services.
182

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Phase One – Worcester Rugby Club
The proposed Worcester Rugby Club Transport Interchange will utilise existing
parking capacity to provide a sustainable travel interchange to cope with the
following requirements:
• The increased demands of the expanding ground as part of the Premiership
requirements (the rugby club needs to expand to a spectator capacity of
12,000 by season 2007/08);
• The need to intercept car journeys into the City and transfer journeys onto the
Worcester Express Network;
• Act as a hub for National Express Coach services, which currently operate via
the M5 and do not (with a few exceptions) serve Worcester.
There is potential for this to become a small scale Coachway facility (similar to
rail parkway stations), with regular and frequent express coach services between
Worcester and key destinations such as Birmingham. The prospect of a
"Birmingham-Worcester tube", similar to the Oxford-London tube, is made more
real, offering greater choice to the County's major working outflow. The parking
capacity will be upgraded to Park and Ride standards. Rest and food and
beverage facilities will be shared with the Rugby Club. Bus access road is
proposed to avoid Junction 6 of the M5.
Phase Two – Worcester West
UoW will need to operate a shuttle bus linking the Henwick and city centre campuses
providing a connection for staff and students. With an expansion of car parking at
the Henwick campus, there may be potential for dual operation of this site for UCW
staff / students and the public as a combined interchange hub serving the A443
approach to the city. This could be an opportunity for the public and private sector to
work together to share the costs of providing transport facilities in a more cost
effective manner than each could do so separately.
Other opportunities for a Worcester West facility could be the Grove Farm
employment site proposed next to the A4440 / A44 / A4103 Bromyard Road
roundabout on the western approach to the city. As well as providing the business
park with a frequent bus services to the city centre, this location is well placed to
intercept the main traffic flows to the city from the west.
Phase Three – Worcester South-East
There are two main options for the passenger transport interchange to the Southeast
of the city. At Whittington, previous proposals were drawn up for a Park and
Ride facility at the A4440 / A44 Swinesherd Way Roundabout, but these have been
put on hold due to the inability to achieve a consensus on the scheme. However, the
site is well located to serve as a Park and Ride facility for the city, potentially
incorporating a “gateway” visitor centre to make use of the views towards the
Malvern Hills enjoyed from this location.
The second option is for the development of a interchange at the Worcestershire
Parkway station, two miles south-east of M5 Junction 7. This could form a dual role
as a Strategic Park and Ride facility for Birmingham, and a local Park and Ride
183

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
facility for Worcester. Options will be viewed as the Parkway proposals are further
developed (see below).
Overall Approach
It is intended that the interchange hub development will be closely linked to the bus
and parking strategies for the city. Close working between County and City Councils
has identified opportunities to link parking charges, bus fares and Park and Ride
charges to promote an integrated approach to the provision of bus services and
parking facilities, and the two Councils are working towards entering into a formal
compact to support this approach.
The aim of this approach is to get the maximum use out of car parks, buses and the
interchange hubs and to ensure that the most suitable method of entering the city is
available to all those travelling to the city centre. The elements of the strategy
include:
• Transport Interchange hubs on all main approaches to Worcester
• Express bus services linking sites to the city centre, to other major
destinations such as Worcester Royal Infirmary, and to other Transport
Interchange hubs
• Local bus services operating on main commercial routes, and providing local
connections to the Express bus stops (potentially using taxibuses)
• Co-ordinated charging policy for bus services, including Park and Ride, and
car parks to ensure that drivers will use the facility most appropriate for their
trip purpose and destination.
• Incorporate coach parking facilities within the Transport Interchange hubs.
• Link local bus services and express coach services at the Transport
Interchange hubs.
• Potentially provide overnight lorry parking at the Transport Interchange hubs.
The objective is to ensure that the Transport Interchange hubs are used for more
than just alternative car parking for the city centre. Currently, Worcester has
inadequate overnight lorry parking facilities, which are poorly located for the
industrial areas of the city or for access to the M5 motorway. Worcester also has
limited parking for coaches bringing visitors to the city, and this can cause
problems within the city centre through parking in inappropriate locations.
National Express long-distance coach services also currently stop at Warndon,
just off Junction 6 of the M5, rather than entering the city itself. This means that
passenger facilities are limited, and there is poor interchange with local bus
services. A combined facility at the Transport Interchange hubs would assist with
this.
Policy WOR2: To introduce a network of express bus services within
Worcester linking a network of Transport Interchange hubs to key
destinations across the city, supported by connecting local taxibus
services and the implementation of appropriate passenger transport
infrastructure.
184

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.9.3 Worcestershire Parkway
The city of Worcester is currently served by two railway stations, Foregate Street
and Shrub Hill. Foregate Street station is centrally located, within easy walking
distance of the city centre, and is the busier of the two stations having been used
by 1.4 million passengers in 2005, compared to around 500,000 at Shrub Hill.
This reflects the fact that Shrub Hill is located at the edge of the city centre and is
served primarily by the Worcester – London train service and services to
Gloucester and Bristol, whereas the bulk of Birmingham services call at Foregate
Street only.
The track layout between the two stations means that there are many services,
notably the Birmingham bound trains that do not call at both stations. In addition,
no trains on the Birmingham – Bristol inter-city route serve Worcester as the time
penalty of diverting off the main line (which by-passes Worcester to the east) is
too great, and outdated signalling on this route results in a significant risk to
reliability.
There is no car parking available at Foregate Street station, and only limited
parking at Shrub Hill, and therefore there is a significant deterrent for prospective
rail passengers who don’t live within walking distance or on a bus route serving
either station. The bus service from the Worcester North Park and Ride does,
however, call at Foregate Street station.
During the first LTP period two studies have been completed into the feasibility of
a Worcestershire Parkway station. The objective of constructing such a station
would be:
• To provide direct access to national long-distance rail services for
Worcestershire – currently, to access such services people need to travel into
Birmingham (a 50 minute journey from Worcester) and change trains at New
Street station.
• To contribute to the RSS Strategic Park and Ride strategy by providing a Park
and Ride facility for journeys being made into Birmingham, thereby reducing
the volume of road traffic making this journey.
• To provide improved interchange between rail journeys on the Malvern –
Worcester – Evesham line and journeys on the Birmingham – Bristol line.
• To make rail a more attractive mode of travel for journeys to London as lack
of car parking at existing Worcester stations is a deterrent to making this
journey by rail.
Both feasibility studies, undertaken for Worcestershire County Council in 2002
and for the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) in 2004, have concluded that there is a
reasonable business case for a Worcester Parkway station. The SRA, however,
has concerns over the impact that an additional station stop on the Birmingham –
Bristol services might have upon existing rail passengers using that route.
Therefore, further study work has been carried out to identify the full impact of the
proposed station upon rail service timetables and operational performance, and
to further develop the business case for the station. This work as completed in
January 2006, and identified some barriers to ensuring that services can call at
the station under existing timetable constraints.
185

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
This is particularly a problem for the Cross-Country services travelling north –
south through the station site. However, it is considered that the re-franchising of
the Central Trains and Cross Country rail franchises offers an opportunity to
review service patterns on this route to tackle the identified problems associated
with a Parkway station stop, and the County Council will work with rail industry
partners to overcome the identified problems.
The Parkway Station is identified as a priority transport scheme within Policy T12
of RSS, and would bring regional as well as local benefits. The station would
form part of the public transport infrastructure required to support Worcester’s
sub-regional role identified in RSS. Crucially, there is interest within the rail
industry in a public – private partnership to deliver the station during the LTP2
period, and the County Council will continue to work actively to promote the
project.
Accordingly, a contribution of up to £3.25 million will be made from the LTP2
Integrated Transport budget to contribute towards the costs of constructing the
station within the LTP2 period. Total construction costs are estimated at £12.2
million, including allowance for optimism bias.
A site for the station is safeguarded within the Wychavon Local Plan, and support
for the Parkway has been confirmed by a wide range of bodies during the LTP2
consultation, including District Councils, the Herefordshire and Worcestershire
Chamber of Commerce, Local Strategic Partnerships and members of the public.
Policy WOR3: To construct a Parkway station at the intersection of the
Worcester – London and Birmingham – Bristol railway lines at Norton,
South-east of Worcester.
4.9.4 A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road
As noted earlier, this road forms one of two vehicular crossings of the River
Severn in the Worcester area, with the other being within the city centre. This is
the only local route that provides a bypass for the city centre, but carries
significantly less traffic than the central route. This is due in part to the poor level
of service offered by this route due to capacity limitations at the river crossing.
The bridge over the River Severn has a design capacity of 18,000 vehicles per
day, but currently carries 33,000 on an average day. Analysis has shown that
this section of road is the most heavily congested route within Worcestershire,
and during the LTP2 consultation strong concern has been expressed by a range
of organisations, including District Councils and the Chamber of Commerce, over
the impact of this congestion on the local economy.
The County Council, working in partnership with a national insurance company,
has obtained real-time journey data from a large sample of vehicles fitted with
GPS monitoring equipment. This data shows that on the Worcester Southern
Link Road average vehicle speeds rarely rise above 30 mph during the day, as
indicated in the following graph. The County Council intends to explore the
further use of this source of data to provide information for use in further
transportation studies for the city (see below).
186

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Average Speed vs Time of Day
All Sections
AV_SPEED_MPH
Average Speed (mph)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
MILES_TRAVELLED
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
Distance Travelled
(miles)
19
21
23
Time of Day
Automatic Traffic Count data for the Southern Link shows that even though the
route is severely congested traffic has continued to grow on this corridor between
1994 and 200. This continued growth, which has led to peak spreading and a
declining level of service, indicates the importance of this road to east-west
movements within Worcestershire. A factor in this continued growth has been
the increase in flow of traffic making work journeys to Malvern, which has
balanced the previous main flow of such traffic commuting from Malvern.
A 4440 Southern Link Annual Volumes
Vehicles
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Temeside Way
Broomhall Way
Road Capacity
Journey time surveys have been carried out which indicate that at peak times the
journey along the route can take 26 minutes, which is three times as long as the
off-peak journey time of 9 minutes. This indicates the extent to which the level of
service on this route is eroded at peak periods.
JOURNEY TIMES A4440
Eastbound – AM Peak: 26 minutes – PM Peak: 17.15 minutes – Off Peak: 9 minutes
Westbound – AM Peak: 19 minutes – PM Peak: 20.3 minutes - Off Peak: 8.15 minutes
187

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
The impact of congestion on this route extends to the Malvern area, as the A4440
forms part of the main road route from Malvern to the strategic road network (M5
motorway). Malvern Hills District Council, the Vision 21 Local Strategic
Partnership for Malvern and the Chamber of Commerce have all expressed
concern about the impact of the Southern Link Road upon the capability of
Malvern to fulfil its RSS role as a node for high technology industry.This concern
also extends to the constraint that the Southern Link Road may have to the future
development of Worcester to meet RSS aspirations for the city.
The longer-term improvement of this route will form part of the Worcester
Transportation Study (see below), but a feasibility study completed in 2003
identified a package of junction improvements that would at least provide some
short-term capacity and safety benefits. This package would involve the
following:
• A4440 / A449 Powick Roundabout – signalisation of roundabout to provide
better queue management, bus priority and safer pedestrian and cycle
crossing facilities.
• A4440 / A38 Ketch Roundabout – re-modelling of junction to replace existing
roundabout with signal controlled interchange to give greater priority to the
majority east – west movement and improved pedestrian and cycle crossing
points.
• A4440 Norton Roundabout – replacement of roundabout with a signal
controlled junction
• A4440 / A44 Whittington Roundabout – construction of slip roads to allow two
key left-turn movements to bypass the roundabout. This will help ensure that
queuing on the A44 eastern approach does not extend back to the M5
Junction 7 as currently happens at peak periods. A future phase may see the
signalisation of the roundabout for remaining movements.
Priority within the LTP2 programme will initially be given to the Powick and
Whittington junction improvements, as these schemes will have benefits for
queue management and have fewer risks to delivery. The programming of the
other junction improvements at Ketch and Norton will depend upon the outcome
of the Worcester Transport Study, and therefore these improvements may not be
delivered during the LTP2 period.
Policy WOR4:To implement a package of improvements on the A4440
Worcester Southern Link Road to reduce congestion on this critical route.
4.9.5 Worcester City Centre
It is generally acknowledged that improvements are required to the central area
of Worcester to make it a more attractive place for visitors, and to boost the local
tourism industry. Traffic levels in the city centre are a constraint to achieving this
objective, and whilst limited alternative routes for cross-city movements exist
given the capacity constraints on the existing river crossings, opportunities to
improve the city centre environment will be taken where possible.
188

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Feasibility work has already been undertaken to investigate improvements to the
Cathedral Roundabout, which has the potential to form an open public space in
front of Worcester Cathedral but currently forms a barrier between the Cathedral
and the pedestrianised High Street. Around 22,000 vehicles a day pass through
the roundabout, and existing pedestrian crossings do not reflect desire lines,
resulting in safety problems for pedestrians.
The long-term vision will be to create a city centre environment in which the
pedestrian has priority over traffic from the new UCW site at Castle Street across
to the Cathedral and the River Severn beyond. Achieving this vision will be
dependent upon the outcome of the study work described below, which will
consider various ways of relieving the existing traffic pressure on the city centre
bridge.
This approach will complement the City Council’s aspirations for a riverside park,
which is the subject of a bid for Landmark Lottery funding. This would link to the
University campus and County library proposals, and would add to the walk /
cycle network by providing two new bridges across the River Severn for
pedestrians and cyclists.
Policy WOR5: To implement measures to support the general improvement
of Worcester city centre and to provide a traffic-free environment at key
locations such as Worcester Cathedral.
4.9.6 Worcester Transportation Study
The measures outlined above will collectively help Worcester meet the challenge
of its expansion over the LTP2 period by improving public transport within the
city, strategic rail access to and from the city, and traffic flow around the bypass.
However, it is clear that the long-term growth of the city to meet the role identified
189

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
within RSS may be constrained by continuing transport problems if major
investment in the transport infrastructure is not forthcoming.
Accordingly, it is clear that a major transportation study is required to identify the
likely additional pressures that Worcester’s transport network will face, and the
most appropriate strategy to adopt to tackle these pressures. This study will
need to be completed to the same timetable as the partial review of the RSS
which will investigate the land use issues surrounding the sub-regional role
identified for Worcester. The RSS review needs to be completed by 2007 when it
will be submitted to central Government for consideration.
The need for the study, when identified within the draft LTP2, created a
substantial number of comments from the general public. In particular, many
residents were concerned about reference to the study needing to consider a
potential North-west Bypass for Worcester, linking the A44 to the west of the city
with the A449 to the north, and providing a third vehicular crossing of the River
Severn for the city. Around 250 representations were received on this subject,
with about two-thirds requesting deletion of the North-west Bypass from LTP2
and one-third supporting its inclusion. This response appears to confirm the
need for the study to consider the benefits and disbenefits of this option.
The study will therefore consider the following broad strategies:
• Option One – implementation of the public transport and sustainable travel
town projects outlined above but no new river crossing or road capacity.
• Option Two – as Option One, but with the dualling of the A4440 Worcester
Southern Link Road.
• Option Three – as Option One, but with the construction of a new road linking
the A44 west of the city with the A449 to the north, providing an additional
river crossing to the north of the city.
• Other Options – other variants on these options may be considered where
identified as appropriate by partners in the study. These could include the
location of a new road crossing elsewhere in the Worcester area, the
introduction of demand management measures within the city centre, and
other traffic management schemes within the central area.
These strategies will be considered alongside various land use options that will be
identified through the RSS partial review work and it intended that the two pieces of
work be fully integrated. The future strategy for Worcester for land use and transport
needs to be developed early in the LTP2 period, and it is anticipated that a major
scheme bid for the transport investment necessary to implement the identified
strategy will be developed during the later stages of LTP2 to allow implementation
during LTP3.
Policy WOR6:To undertake a transportation and land use study to identify
the long-term transport strategy for Worcester to enable the city to fulfil its
sub-regional role.
190

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.10 AREA STRATEGIES - WYCHAVON
191

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Summary of Key Issues
Wychavon District covers a predominantly rural part of Worcestershire, with local
facilities being focussed on the three market towns of Droitwich, Evesham and
Pershore. Travel patterns are particularly dispersed, and consultation work from
LTP2 and the accessibility strategy have indicated access to facilities is a major
local concern.
Significant investment in improved roads has been made during the first LTP
period with the completion of the Wyre Piddle Bypass and the Chadbury-Twyford
Link Road, leading to the re-designation of the northern route between Evesham
and Worcester as the new A44. The old A44 through Pershore has been
downgraded.
The agricultural industry within the Vale of Evesham is a major source of local
employment, and generates a significant amount of heavy goods vehicle traffic,
which can have a major environmental impact on local communities. Therefore,
the work of the Vale of Evesham Freight Quality Partnership is crucial to the
improvement of communications between those communities and the haulage
industry.
4.10.1 Evesham
Evesham is the largest market town within Wychavon, and although the opening
of the Chadbury-Twyford Link Road in 2004 means that the town has a bypass
for most through traffic movements the High Street remains one of the most
congested streets within Worcestershire. Additionally, a town centre audit
undertaken by the District Council highlighted that people feel the High Street
offers a pedestrian unfriendly environment.
192

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Recognising these problems, the County, District and Town Councils have
undertaken an extensive study to identify the potential for improvements to the
High Street. This project was chosen by the national group Transport 2000 as
one of five national pilot schemes for town centre traffic management
improvements. Extensive consultation has led to the development of a preferred
scheme for the High Street, as shown on the plan below. The estimated cost of
this scheme is £3 million.
The scheme involves the following:
• Rationalise on-street parking provision, including greater disabled parking and
secure motorcycle parking
• On-street cycle lane along High Street and Vine Street
• Improvement of bus stops facilities
• Review of street furniture to minimise street clutter
• Provision for public art
• Replace existing controlled pedestrian crossings with more regular
uncontrolled crossings that reflect desire lines
• Reconfiguration of carriageway to provide smoother traffic flow whilst
promoting pedestrian and cycle safety
Partnership funding for this project is likely to be required from a variety of
sources, including LTP2, Wychavon District Council, Section 106 contributions
from developments within Evesham, and Advantage West Midlands. Therefore,
it is proposed that the enhancement of Evesham High Street will be completed
during the LTP2 period.
Policy WYCH1:To work in partnership with Wychavon District Council,
Evesham Town Council and Advantage West Midlands to implement
transport improvements within Evesham High Street as part of the Market
Towns Transportation Initiative.
193

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.10.2 Pershore
This market town, on the old A44, has a High Street that is one of the finest
Georgian streets in England. Although the strategic route between Evesham and
Worcester no longer runs through the town, traffic levels on the High Street
remain high. The current flow is 11,400 vehicles per day and traffic surveys show
that 43% of this flow is through traffic. This supports local perception that the
High Street is still heavily as a through route, particularly by Heavy Goods
Vehicles.
An accident problem with pedestrian casualties also exists on the High Street,
and therefore the County has worked with District and Town Councils to develop
a scheme that will address these safety and environmental concerns.
It is intended that the traffic management scheme for the High Street will be
implemented during the LTP2 period.
Policy WYCH2:To work in partnership with Wychavon District Council and
Pershore Town Council to implement transport improvements in Pershore
High Street to address safety, environmental and traffic management
issues as part of the Market Towns Transport Initiative.
4.10.3 Keytec Industrial Estate Link Road
To the north of Pershore, LTP2 consultation has identified a strong local desire
for strategic traffic to be diverting away from the A4104 approach to Pinvin
Crossroads, a signal controlled junction with the A44 that can be congested at
times. This could be achieved through the construction of a new Link Road, the
Wyre Piddle Western Link Road, which would connect to the western end of the
Wyre Piddle Bypass.
Funding is currently unavailable for this scheme, but the County Council will
review this position should proposals to extend the adjacent Keytec employment
site come forward during the LTP2 period.
In the meantime, the A44 / A4104 signals will be reviewed to identify ways in
which traffic congestion at this location could be reduced.
Policy WYCH3:To review the operation of the Pinvin Crossroads to identify
ways to reduce congestion at this location, and work towards the
construction of the Keytec Link Road should developer funding become
available for this scheme.
4.10.4 Droitwich
The County Council will work with District and Town Councils to identify any
necessary transportation improvements within this town centre. Various
improvements have already been undertaken to support residential and retail
developments within the town, and the Droitwich Canal project, which will see the
re-opening to navigation of the Canal through the town, will provide opportunities
for further improvements.
194

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
A working group has been established that is focussed on Droitwich town centre
enhancement, and should this identify any strategic transport improvements that
would benefit the town centre these will be considered as part of the Market
Towns Transportation Initiative.
Policy WYCH4:To work with the District Council and Droitwich Town
Council to identify transport improvements that would benefit the town
centre and implement these through the Market Towns Transport Initiative.
4.10.5 Vale of Evesham Freight Quality Partnership
The FQP was established in 2003 as a response to increasing pressures on local
communities arising from the movement of goods to and from agricultural
establishments within the Vale of Evesham. The FQP embraces six local
authorities including Warwickshire and Gloucestershire County Councils as well
as representatives of the haulage industry, agricultural industry and local
communities.
The Wychavon Local Plan supports the principle of encouraging the location of
freight generating activities at sites with good access to the strategic road
network, and this approach is supported by the County Council.
LTP2 funding will be used to support measures identified through the Vale of
Evesham FQP that seek to minimise the impact of heavy goods traffic on local
communities whilst supporting the continuing development of the agricultural
industry within the area.
Policy WYCH5: To implement measures identified through the Vale of
Evesham FQP to minimise the impact of heavy goods vehicles on local
communities whilst supporting the continuing development of the
agricultural industry in the area.
4.10.6 Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
The Cotswold AONB covers part of South-east Worcestershire, notably the
Broadway and Bredon Hill areas. The impact of traffic on local communities is a
major concern of the AONB Management Board, and measures to minimise this
impact by promoting sustainable tourism will be supported by the County Council.
These measures could include promoting use of public transport, improved bus /
rail interchange at Evesham station with feeder services to key tourist
destinations such as Broadway, and improving walking and cycling routes within
the AONB area.
Policy WYCH6: To support measures to minimise the impact of traffic upon
local communities within the Cotswold AONB area.
195

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
196

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.11 AREA STRATEGIES – WYRE FOREST
197

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Summary of Key Issues
Wyre Forest District has an urban core with the towns of Kidderminster,
Stourport-on-Severn and Bewdley, and a rural hinterland that is largely
dependent on these towns for facilities.
The District has strong links with the West Midlands conurbation, as well as with
the other large towns in the north of the County, and this is demonstrated by the
strong journey to work movements between these areas.
The A449 and A456 routes are currently Trunk Roads, although these have been
identified as non-core routes by the Highways Agency. Negotiations have
commenced between the HA and Worcestershire County Council regarding the
proposed hand-over of responsibility for these routes to the Council (this process
is called de-Trunking) in April 2007.
Two Air Quality Management Areas have been declared within Wyre Forest,
these being within Bewdley and northern Kidderminster. Congestion has been
identified as a significant problem within Kidderminster as well as Stourport, and
this will constraint the development of the British Sugar site on the Stourport
Road employment corridor unless an appropriate transport strategy is put in
place. This site is due for development during the LTP2 period, and forms a
major element of the economic regeneration strategy for this part of
Worcestershire.
The District Council, in conjunction with AWM, have also published an Economic
and Development Strategy for Kidderminster, which, alongside a Central Area
Action Plan, will form the blueprint for the further regeneration of the town.
Improving transport infrastructure within the area will be crucial to the realisation
of the objectives outlined in this strategy.
A Bus Quality Partnership has been established covering the Wyre Forest area,
and this has been successful in attracting Rural Bus Challenge funding to support
the improvement of local bus services. Meanwhile, the Wyre Forest Schools
Review undertaken by the County Council will result in a major change to school
provision across the District, which will influence school travel patterns. This
offers an opportunity to introduce a school travel strategy that seeks to promote
sustainable travel. The Schools Review is due to be implemented in 2007.
4.11.1 Kidderminster
Kidderminster is a traditional centre for the carpet industry that has undergone
major changes over the first LTP period. A major re-development of the northern
part of the town centre has now been completed, and attention is turning to the
southern and eastern areas.
Kidderminster Ring Road provides a partial bypass for the town centre, but also
forms a significant barrier for pedestrians and cyclists seeking to access the town
centre from surrounding residential areas. Congestion is also a problem at
various junctions around the town, and this is a contributory factor to the air
quality problems identified in the northern part of the town.
198

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Horsefair AQMA
The District Council have declared an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) at
Horsefair. The air quality problem stems mainly from the queuing traffic along a
short, narrow section of the A451 between the A456 Ring Road junction and the
Horsefair junction. The interaction between the junctions means that queuing
traffic in both directions is often experienced, and the nature of the buildings on
either side of the road mean that emissions result in excessive pollution being
experienced by residential properties.
A traffic management package involving reconfiguration of the junctions at either
end of Horsefair, and the introduction of linked signals to ensure better queue
management, has been identified. This package could be implemented during
the LTP2 period, although discussions with Wyre Forest District Council have
made it clear that re-development proposals in the Clensmore Street area of the
town, close to Horsefair, may provide further opportunities for reviewing traffic
management arrangements in this part of the network. Therefore, within the
Implementation Plan, funding for these measures has been allocated for the later
years of the LTP2 programme.
A further benefit of the junction improvements would be to provide at-grade
crossing facilities for pedestrians and cyclists at these junctions and remove the
need to use subways to cross the Ring Road. These issues will also be tackled
as part of any wider development of this part of the town centre.
Policy WF1: To work with Wyre Forest District Council to identify and
implement an appropriate traffic management scheme to reduce traffic
emissions on the A451 at Horsefair, and to enable the AQMA designation to
be removed.
4.11.2 Stourport Road Employment Corridor
The Stourport Road employment corridor lies between Kidderminster and
Stourport, and is well located for access to labour catchments, particularly as it is
located within the most deprived ward in Worcestershire. Therefore, there is a
strong commitment to developing further employment opportunities within the
corridor, with the now redundant British Sugar site being the main development
opportunity.
This site is 24 hectares in size, and the Wyre Forest Local Plan allocates it for
employment use, with half of the site being programmed for development by
2011, and the remainder beyond 2011. The previous employment use on the
site, as a sugar refinery, generated significant movement of raw materials at peak
processing periods, but relatively small movements of employees. It is
anticipated that the re-development of the site will lead to a more intensive
employment base, which will place greater pressure on the local transport
network at peak periods.
Whilst the site is well located for bus access between Stourport and
Kidderminster, road access is constrained by congestion within both of these
centres. With travel demand to and from the site likely to increase significantly, a
199

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
transport assessment of the site is necessary to support any re-development
proposals.
The County Council will seek to work with the District Council, the site owner
(Associated British Foods), AWM, developers, and other agencies to identify the
appropriate access strategy for the site. This will include an investigation into the
feasibility of constructing a new link road connecting the A451 and the A449
across the Stour valley. Such a link would help address congestion problems
within Stourport and Kidderminster, and would remove one of the access
constraints relating to the site, but would also have an environmental impact,
especially upon the Stour Valley SSSI. The SEA produced for the LTP2 has
highlighted the need for a robust Environmental Assessment to be produced as
part of the Wyre Forest Transport Study, and English Nature will be invited to
form part of the Study Steering Group.
Once identified, the appropriate strategy will be implemented during LTP3 (2011-
16) and potentially beyond this date, depending on the phasing of the site redevelopment
and funding availability.
Policy WF2: To undertake a transportation study for the Wyre Forest area
which will result in the identification of the preferred transport strategy to
support the economic regeneration of the Stourport Road Employment
Corridor. This will form the basis for a future major scheme funding bid for
implementation of the strategy within the LTP3 period.
4.11.3 Kidderminster Railway Station
The railway station within Kidderminster lies to the east of the town centre, and is
separated from the centre by the dual carriageway Ring Road. The station is the
second most heavily used station in the County, and passenger numbers have
grown significantly in recent years (61% growth between 1994 and 2005)
following the introduction of improved services connecting the town with
Birmingham and peak hour services to London.
Alongside the main line railway station is the terminus of the Severn Valley
Railway, a preserved railway which is one of Worcestershire’s greatest visitor
attractions. The location of the SVR offers good opportunities to promote
integration between main line and tourist rail services, and promotion of joint
ticketing arrangements will be supported.
In addition, opportunities to develop the role of SVR as a passenger transport
provider, particularly for utility trips between Bewdley and Kidderminster, will be
investigated. Previous feasibility study work has been undertaken looking at the
potential for ultra light rail operations on this route, but the identified subsidy
requirement to allow this to happen was too great at approximately £250,000 a
year. However, other opportunities may exist to make better overall use of the
SVR and these will be explored.
Improvements to the station to ensure that it offers step-free access for less
mobile sectors of the community are proposed in the SRA Railways for All
strategy, alongside funding to ensure that the station is staffed throughout its
200

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
hours of operation. These improvements are welcomed and will be supported
through the LTP2 by implementing associated improvements at the station in
conjunction with Train Operating Companies.
The station is on a hill above the town centre, and the route for pedestrians and
cyclists is not an attractive one involving passage through subways under the
Ring Road. A key opportunity to improve the route will be through the redevelopment
of the Worcester Street site in the town centre, which is adjacent to
the Comberton Hill interchange. Improvements to the pedestrian route, possibly
incorporating a new footbridge over the Ring Road, will be investigated in
conjunction with the District Council and the developers of the site.
In addition, potential improvements to the bus / rail interchange at the station will
be developed in partnership with the rail industry and the Bus Quality
Partnership.
Policy WF3: To work with rail industry partners, Wyre Forest District
Council and the Severn Valley Railway to undertake improvements at
Kidderminster Railway Station that will improve accessibility within and to
the station, improve the connectivity between the station and the town
centre, and improve bus / rail interchange.
4.11.4 Bewdley
This market town on the River Severn contains the second Air Quality
Management Area (AQMA) declared within Wyre Forest. The site is at Welch
Gate, within the town centre.
Opportunity Bewdley, which manages the market towns initiative within the town
and is a multi-agency partnership with strong local community representation,
has helped to co-ordinate local consultation on transport issues. These
measures will bring associated benefits within the town centre as well as
addressing air quality problems at Welch Gate.
The County Council has worked closely with the District Council, the Town
Council and Opportunity Bewdley (the Market Town Partnership) to identify
remedial measures that would reduce traffic emissions, thereby improving air
quality. Traffic modelling has been carried out to test different traffic
management options for the town centre.
At Welch Gate in Bewdley, residential properties are close to the road, which
forms the main access to the town centre from the west. Whilst surveys have
shown that the majority of through traffic uses the Bewdley Bypass, there
remains a substantial traffic flow on Welch Gate as a result of local movements
within the town. As this traffic has to give priority to traffic on Dowles Road,
queuing traffic often extends along Welch Gate contributing to the air quality
problem.
A number of traffic management measures have been assessed, and a package
of measures identified that will cost up to £150,000 to implement. These could
include improvements to pedestrian crossing facilities within the town centre,
altering the junction layout at the Welch Gate junction, and a personalised travel
plan campaign within the town to reduce the number of local trips made by car. It
201

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
is intended to implement these measures as part of the Air Quality strategy within
LTP2.
In addition, ways to make better use of the Bewdley Bypass will be investigated
during the LTP2 period recognising that this crossing over the River Severn is
one of the more lightly used crossings within the County, and has significant
spare capacity available.
Policy WF4: To implement a package of traffic management measures
within Bewdley to enhance the town centre environment, including the
improvement of air quality and safety within Welch Gate, enabling the
AQMA designation to be removed.
4.11.5 Stourport-on-Severn
A transportation study was completed for Stourport-on-Severn in 2004. The
catalyst for this was the traffic congestion experienced in the town at weekday
peak periods, and at holiday peaks such as Bank Holidays when the town
attracts a significant day-tripper market.
The study involved extensive traffic modelling, and this concluded that a full
Relief Road would be the most effective option for tackling congestion. However,
although the economic appraisal of the scheme returned a positive cost-benefit
figure, the total scheme costs, at £47 million, are considered too great to justify
promoting the scheme at this stage. Government has clearly indicated that no
new bids for Major Scheme funding are anticipated with LTP2, and this would
clearly come into this category.
However, the County Council considers that a strong case for such a scheme has
been demonstrated, and has ensured that the scheme has been included in the
Regional Prioritisation Framework for Transport, which will be used to advise
Government of those schemes which should be considered for Major Scheme
funding. Under this framework, it is clear that no funding for a scheme of this
scale will be available until the LTP3 period (2011-16) at the earliest. Therefore,
the position of this scheme will be reviewed following the outcome of the Wyre
Forest Transportation Study referred to above.
Given this position, it is considered important that interim traffic management
measures are promoted within Stourport to tackle the worst congestion hotspots,
202

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
and improve facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. This package would
potentially involve junction improvements, pedestrian crossings, footway
widening, and a parking strategy involving improved parking enforcement and
potentially new car parking for visitors at locations that intercept traffic before it
reaches the main one-way system in the town centre.
To develop proposals, the County Council intends to work with the District
Council, Stourport Forward (the market towns initiative) and other relevant
partners such as British Waterways and the Town Council to identify the detailed
strategy and implementation programme. This is a similar approach to that
successfully used in Bewdley.
Policy WF5: To work with Stourport Forward partners to identify and
implement a package of transportation measures to reduce congestion and
improve the environment within Stourport town centre.
4.11.6 Wyre Forest Bus Quality Partnership
The demand for improved public and community transport within the Wyre Forest
area has been established through a number of consultations, including the
Bewdley Town “health check” carried out for the Market Towns Initiative, the
Bewdley Rural Parishes survey, the Wyre Forest Local Strategic Partnership
community consultation and the Wyre Forest Older Peoples Forum. The Bus
Quality Partnership, formally established in 2003, has been set up partially in
response to these pressures, and involves County and District Councils, local bus
operators and other agencies such as the police, Wyre Forest Primary Care Trust
and market towns bodies.
The Partnership has successfully promoted a Rural Bus Challenge project, which
seeks to provide improved bus services, especially in the evening, linking
Bewdley and Stourport with Kidderminster railway station and Hartlebury.
Improved bus infrastructure, notably bus stops, and the provision of real time
passenger information also form part of the initiative which is being jointly funded
by local bus operators and the District Council.
From LTP2, the County Council will seek to implement infrastructure
improvements and to improve public transport facilities as identified and
prioritised by the Partnership. These measures will include bus priority, bus stop
improvements, better passenger information, traffic management measures to
improve bus service reliability, and the retention and enhancement of
Kidderminster Bus Station.
Policy WF6: To support the work of the Wyre Forest Bus Quality
Partnership by helping the development of a fully integrated, affordable
public and community transport network for Wyre Forest, providing the
opportunity for seamless multi-modal journeys.
4.11.7 A456 / A449 Trunk Roads
These Trunk Roads connect Kidderminster to the national road network at
Worcester (M5 junction 6), Quinton near Birmingham (M5 Junction 3) and to
Wolverhampton. They have been identified by the Highways Agency (HA) to be
203

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
non-core Trunk Roads, and as such the HA will be seeking to pass responsibility
for the management of these routes to the County Council. This process has
commenced, with discussions between the HA and the County Council
underway. The HA wish to complete this process by April 2007.
There are a number of issues relating to these routes that the County Council
would wish to see addressed before accepting responsibility for them. These
include maintenance and safety issues, as well as the need for improvement of
the routes. Particular concerns relate to congestion on the A449 through
Kidderminster, and on the A456 through Hagley.
The Kidderminster – Blakedown – Hagley Bypass was identified by the Highways
Agency in the early 1990’s as a route improvement but was subsequently
dropped from the national roads programme. No further road improvements
have been identified for this route, other than local safety schemes, and the
County Council would wish to see route studies undertaken for both routes to
identify issues, improvements and required funding before accepting
responsibility for the routes.
Whilst the Highways Agencies are undertaking Route Management Plans for the
core Trunk network, there are no proposals to do so for the non-core network.
The County Council would wish to work with the Highways Agency to develop
such strategies for these routes prior to any handover of responsibility.
Policy WF7: To work with the Highways Agency to develop the future
strategy for the management of the A449 and A456 Trunk Road routes.
4.11.8 Wyre Forest Schools Review
The County Council has undertaken a comprehensive review of education
provision for the Wyre Forest area, and has identified a strategy that will be
implemented from September 2007. This involves some school closures, merges
and new schools, and will obviously alter catchment areas. This will influence
school travel patterns, and provides an opportunity to break existing school travel
patterns and influence more sustainable patterns.
This will require joint working with Children’s Services, the schools themselves
and public transport operators to identify the opportunities for better integration.
In particular, the potential for staggered school operating times, which could
result in more efficient use of school buses, should be investigated, as well as the
potential for the introduction of a US-style Yellow Bus scheme with dedicated
school buses.
A Partnership between different County Council staff will be established to
examine the impact of the schools review on school transport, and LTP2 will
support the implementation of the measures recommended by this group.
Policy WF8: To undertake a review of all aspects of school transport
provision, including School Travel Plans, as part of the Wyre Forest
schools review, and in particular to identify opportunities for better
integration of school bus services.
204

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.12 ASSET MANAGEMENT
205

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.12.1 Introduction
Overview
The transportation network within Worcestershire comprises a wide range of
infrastructure, with the main headings being identified as follows:
• Highways and Footways
• Footpaths and Cycle Paths
• Public Rights of Ways
• Bridges and Structures
• Streetlighting
• Road Signs
• Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings
• Street Furniture
• Public transport infrastructure
Collectively, the value of these assets is known to be significant, but at the
present stage of development of the Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP),
it is acknowledged that the Council does not have a reliable valuation for the
transportation network. However, the £3.1 million cost of re-constructing Upton
Viaduct illustrates that the full replacement of an individual asset can be
extremely expensive.
4.12.1.1 Highways and Footways
The local road network within Worcestershire comprises almost 4,000 kilometres,
broken down amongst different class of road as indicated in the following table:
Road Class Urban (km) Rural (km) Total (km) %age of Total
“A” class 115.3 374.4 489.7 12.4
“B” class 147.9 243.3 391.2 9.9
“C” class 158.0 908.0 1066.0 26.9
Unclassified Roads 1206.4 805.0 2011.4 50.8
Total 1627.6 2330.7 3958.3 100.0
It can be seen that of Worcestershire’s highway network, around three-quarters is
made up of minor roads, and one quarter of “A” and “B” class roads. Around
40% of the network is classed as urban, which effectively means that a speed
limit of 40 m.p.h. or less applies, with the remainder being classed as rural
routes.
The role of “A” and “B” class roads as strategic routes connecting communities is
demonstrated by the preponderance of rural routes. The “C” class routes are
also largely rural in nature, this reflecting the dense network of country roads
connecting smaller rural communities across the County. Unclassified roads tend
to be a mixture of country lanes and urban streets on housing and industrial
estates, hence the higher proportion of urban routes.
206

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Footways tend to be provided alongside roads, especially within urban areas.
Virtually all urban roads will have a footway on at least one side of the road, and
generally on both sides. In general, only the major rural roads will have a
footway.
4.12.1.2 Footpaths, Cyclepaths and Rights of Way
In general, footpaths and cyclepaths are provided remote from a road
carriageway, often providing more direct segregated routes for pedestrians and
cyclists as a safer, more attractive alternative to the roadside. Remote footpath
networks will often not be adopted routes, and maintenance would not be a
County Council function unless the route is also a Public Right of Way.
The Public Rights of Way network in Worcestershire is extensive, with a total
length of over 4,500 kilometres comprising footpaths, bridleways and byways.
Whilst these routes tend to be of a lower surfacing standard than the adopted
network, there remains a considerable maintenance burden. On the Rights of
Way, this can also often involve substantial structures.
4.12.1.3 Bridges and Structures
There are around 870 significant bridges and structures on the Worcestershire
network, including bridges, culverts, major retaining walls, and underpasses. The
nature of Worcestershire’s network means that there is a great pressure upon
around 20 of these bridges, which offer the few bridging points across the
Counties’ main rivers.
Some bridges, over railways or Canals, can be the responsibility of the authorities
responsible for those transport corridors, but in general the responsibility rests
with the County Council.
4.12.1.4 Streetlighting
Within Worcestershire, streetlighting is generally restricted to the larger villages,
towns and cities, as the installation of lighting is often resisted when considered
in smaller rural settlements. Despite this, there are still around 51,000 street
lights across the County, performing a major function in safety and security
terms, and this is a major asset to manage in terms of both the physical
infrastructure and the electricity consumption necessary to keep the system
operational.
4.12.1.5 Road Signs and Street Furniture
The highway network contains a large number of road signs, and other items of
street furniture such as marker posts and bollards, and it is recognized that the
inventory of such items requires updating. This is an early action within the
TAMP.
4.12.1.6 Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Crossings
There are a significant number of pedestrian crossings and junctions that are
controlled by traffic signals, and this requires specialist knowledge for ongoing
207

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
maintenance and further development. With these specialist skills in short supply
nationally, undertaking full management of this asset can be challenging.
The modern systems have features such a self-reporting of problems which make
inspection and trouble-shooting easier for the maintenance teams, but many
Worcestershire signals are now out-dated. The overall management systems for
the Urban Traffic Control system in Worcester (SCOOT) has been updated, but
further work will be required as part of the Intelligent Transport Systems project
that is proposed as part of LTP2.
4.12.1.7 Public Transport Infrastructure
As the County Council does not own or operate any of the Counties’ bus and rail
stations, then there is relatively little public transport infrastructure to be included
within the TAMP. Bus stops, shelters and information flags are generally the
responsibility of the District, Town or Parish Council, or the bus operator.
However, it is recognized that this causes inconsistency in the standard of such
facilities, and the County Council will in future be looking to become actively
involved in the management of bus stop infrastructure.
4.12.1.8 Funding
Maintenance of these assets is funded from the LTP Structural Maintenance
allocation and from the County Council’s overall budget. The indicative allocation
for the LTP2 period figure is less than that for the LTP1 period, whilst the County
Council is faced with significant financial pressures over the 2006-08 period, and
therefore the emphasis on obtaining value for money when investing in
maintenance works needs to be as strong as ever.
For 2006/07, the overall funding available for highways maintenance activities
can be summarized as follows:
• LTP2 Structural Maintenance Block Allocation - £8.696 million
• LTP2 A38 De-Trunking Allocation - £594,000
• Worcestershire County Council capital programme - £960,000 (towards
Depots and Rights of Way structures)
• Worcestershire County Council revenue programme – £15,457 million
This gives a total sum approaching £29 million for the asset management
programme. Whilst performance indicators can show whether the general
condition of the highway network is improving or worsening, and assist by
allowing investment to be directed towards those areas of the network requiring
most improvement, it is clear that the overall planning of maintenance works over
the longer-term is essential.
Therefore, the early priority is to produce the Transportation Asset Management
Plan early in the LTP2 period to provide strategic direction to the investment
decisions.
208

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
4.12.2 Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP)
Overview
Work is progressing on the development of the Transport Asset Management
Plan (TAMP) for Worcestershire. The TAMP has been developed in accordance
with the County Surveyor’s Society (CSS) Framework for Highways Asset
Management and in close liaison with other highway authorities in the Midlands,
and greater details on this crucial plan are given below.
The TAMP will provide a framework for the development of systems to manage
transportation assets on a long term basis using whole life costing within the
context of statutory requirements, customer expectation and sustainable funding
4.12.2.1 Programme of Work
The County has been working closely with other Midlands authorities to produce
a TAMP in accordance with the CSS Framework for Asset Management
guidance published in 2004, thereby producing a common approach across the
region. The programme for the preparation of the TAMP is as follows:
• June 2004 – CSS Guidance launched
• Spring 2005 – Opus contracted by Midlands Authorities’ to produce a
generic model TAMP to form a common format for use by all Authorities
• Autumn 2005 – baseline information and analysis completed
• Spring 2006 – Opus to launch the generic TAMP
• Autumn 2006 – draft Worcestershire TAMP to be produced
The main areas that will be covered by the TAMP are listed below:
• Review current practice and identify areas of improvement to align current
business practices with asset management principles
• Prepare appropriate inventories of assets
• Prepare life-cycle plans for each asset group
• Produce overall valuation of all asset groups
• Undertake risk assessment to identify most vulnerable assets
• Agree the appropriate levels of service for each asset group
• Identify funding levels required to bring asset groups up to the required
standard
• Produce long-term investment plan for transportation assets
It is anticipated that the TAMP will remain in development for the first two years of
the LTP2 period, and that whilst its preparation will yield much useful information
in the interim to assist with the maintenance of individual asset groups, the full
benefits of the TAMP will not be realised until 2008/09 onwards.
Lifecycle plans are being developed throughout the Midlands region by regional
specialist practitioner groups for each of the main asset groups to ensure that
209

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
long-term maintenance implications are considered at the creation of a new
asset.
As the elements of the TAMP develop integrated renewal and maintenance
programmes can be developed.
The TAMP will consider all elements of the network, and will seek to identify the
costs to the community of maintenance failure. With Worcestershire’s
dependence upon river crossings, a bridge failure, for example, could be
catastrophic to the local community.
4.12.2.2 Baseline Data Collection and Highway Condition Monitoring
The Council will fully comply with standard guidance on the collection of data
relating to highway and footway condition, and the indicators used within LTP2
reflect this. In order to be able to fully identify the long-term trend with highway
and footway condition within the County, however, the Council will retain the old
system of collecting data alongside the new systems introduced in 2005/06.
The targets and indicators are outlined in Chapter 6.
In order to improve the ability to undertake inspections and collect data, the
Council is in the process of recruiting additional Maintenance Inspectors to
operate within Worcestershire from 2006/07. This is a direct response to the new
inspection requirements introduced under Best Practice guidance.
4.12.2.3 Linkage with Other Service Areas
One area of the TAMP that will be crucial is the identification of those other LTP2
projects that may be proceeding that can be easily linked with maintenance
works that are required for any specific asset group. This is a practice that
already occurs, with one example being the undertaking of a scheme at Holt
Fleet which included the following elements:
• Road re-surfacing along the A4133.
• Bridge repairs and water-proofing work at Holt Fleet Bridge
• The introduction of a 40 m.p.h. speed limit on this section of the A4133
This single scheme brought together these three elements and whilst there was a
three week road closure to allow the works to be completed, the disruption to the
traveling public was minimized when compared to carrying the works out
separately.
The role of the TAMP will be to identify further opportunities for joint working, and
major LTP2 projects where such opportunities may exist include:
• A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road
• Project Express – especially where bus priority measures are being installed
• Worcestershire Parkway – site access arrangements
210

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Market Towns Transportation Initiative – works in the town centers at
Bewdley, Evesham, Pershore and Stourport-on-Severn
• Road Safety schemes
• Sustainable Travel schemes
• A441 Bordesley Bypass
• Bridge replacement / refurbishment schemes
As well as identifying major projects where joint schemes could be implemented,
the TAMP will need to consider the implications of the more detailed programmes
such as Sustainable Travel schemes, as well as opportunities to link to
improvement works being carried out by public utilities (e.g. gas pipe or water
main renewals).
4.12.2.4 Overall Objectives
The overall objective of producing the TAMP will be:
• To allow better informed decision-making on investment programmes
• To identify opportunities to maximize efficient use of resources by
combining schemes
• To allow better informed budget decisions to be made, and provide better
quality of information to support funding bids
• To permit the development of broad long-term investment programmes
• To clearly identify the basis for investment decisions
• To develop robust monitoring regimes across all asset groups
Taken together, these objectives will permit the development of a transportation
network that will meet the demands placed upon it for the movement of people
and goods in a safe and efficient manner.
Policy TAMP1:
Policy TAMP2:
To produce a Transportation Asset Management Plan for
Worcestershire, setting out the County Council’s forward
strategy for the maintenance of transportation assets.
To maintain the highway network and other transportation
assets to a suitable standard that permits the safe
passage of people and goods within Worcestershire.
4.12.2.5 Bridges and structures
Bridge Management
There are 870 bridges and smaller structures (culverts, retaining walls, etc.) on
Worcestershire’s transport network that are maintained by the County.
A review of bridge management practice has been undertaken in response to the
recently published Code of Practice “Management of Highway Structures”. The
211

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
County will develop its systems to achieve compliance with the code over the
next three years in accordance with the suggested milestones.
A new computerised bridge management system has been purchased in order to
facilitate the management of structures information and will enable detailed
interrogation of the status of the structures stock.
Fully populating the structures database and data verification is expected to take
three years in line with the adoption of the code of practice recommendations.
The Council will also be reviewing its bridge inspection resources and practices,
and bringing these into line with the new Code of Practice from 2006/07.
Bridge Condition
The vulnerability of Worcestershire transportation network to problems with
strategic river crossings has been highlighted in Chapter 3. An early focus within
LTP2 will be to complete Principle Inspection of the most important river
crossings to allow full information on their condition to be gathered. This is likely
to then lead to the development of a major investment programme in these key
structures, which could form the basis of a bid for Major Maintenance funds.
Forward Programme
The forward programme for bridgeworks in Worcestershire is summarized in the
table below. However, it should be emphasised that this is subject to change
once further detailed is information from the programme of Principal Inspections
that is underway. However, a summary of the major projects is given below:
A448 Tardebigge Bridge
Replacement of expansive fill within the bridge abutments, due for completion in
June 2006.
A451 Stourport Bridge
Major re-furbishment of the bridge including renewal of waterproofing and deck
replacement, as well as structural repair. Progammed for completion during
2006/07, the timing of the works are particularly sensitive in this town centre
location, and a specific working group has been established with local
representation to help identify the best period to work in, and to maximize the
flow of information to the community.
A449 Powick New Bridge
Minor repair works programmed for 2006/07.
A4184 Evesham – Abbey Bridge and Viaduct
These structures, which carry the A4184 over the River Avon and the associated
floodplain, are significantly below strength and a temporary 7.5 tonne weight
restriction has been identified as a necessity. Liaison with the local community is
underway to assess the implications of this on issues such as local bus services,
deliveries to Evesham town centre, and local traffic management. .
212

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
It is anticipated that strengthening of this river crossing will cost in the order of
£6.5 million. This level of expenditure will not be able to be met through the LTP2
Structural Maintenance allocation without a significant impact upon the overall
highway maintenance programme. Therefore, feasibility studies of strengthening
options will be undertaken in 2006/07 with a view to submitting a major scheme
bid in 2007.
Opportunities to bring the scheme forward in association with the Evesham High
Street proposals under the Market Towns Transport Initiative will be explored to
minimise the disruption of the works upon the town.
Forward Programme
A4133 Holt Fleet Bridge and A4112 Teme Bridge, Tenbury have both been
assessed as being capable of carrying full loading. However both structures are
in need of general refurbishment and this work is programmed for 2007/08.
Recent principal inspections have identified a number of concrete structures built
in the 1960s and 70s that are in need of major maintenance in the near future.
Those identified to date are shown in the table below. The overall programme
adds up to an investment need of over £8 million, but with further detail Principal
Inspections being undertaken, it is anticipated that funding requirements will far
exceed this value.
Network Rail has identified Honeybourne Road (road over rail) as being in need
of strengthening feasibility studies are being carried out in 2006/2007 and a
strengthening contract should be let in 2007/2008.
Structure Name
Route
Number
Strengthening/major
maintenance
Cost
(£’000’s)
Date
Local Authority
Powick New A449 Major maintenance 60 2006
Stourport A451 Strengthening 800 2006
Evesham Viaduct A4184 Strengthening 4,500 2006 – 2009
Evesham Abbey A4184 Strengthening 2,000 2006 - 2009
Bridge
Carrington A4440 Major maintenance 60 2007 – 2008
Holt Fleet A4133 Major maintenance 500 2007 - 2008
Teme Bridge A4112 Major maintenance 150 2007- 2008
Tenbury
New Stanford B4203 Major maintenance 300 2007 – 2008
Knights ford A44 Major maintenance 150 2008-2009
Church Avenue A491 Major maintenance 300 2008-2009
Bromsgrove A491 Major maintenance 300 2008-2009
Road west
Packhorse A435 Major maintenance 80 2008 –2009
Dark Lane A435 Major maintenance 80 2008 -2009
Total 8,380
Rail
Honeybourne
Road
(Network Rail)
C20006 Strengthening 500,000 2007 -2008
213

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Underpasses
The county is working closely with Redditch Borough Council in maintaining
subways. The Borough is undertaking regular graffiti inspections as part of their
routine inspection regime and this has resulted in more efficient staff utilisation. A
beneficial adjunct to this arrangement is early reporting of other defects and
vandalism within subways. The first year of operation of this arrangement has
proven to be successful and the potential for working with other District Councils
on a similar basis will be explored.
Summary
Worcestershire is vulnerable to problems with its main bridges, with major
disruption for the travelling public likely if a structure has to be restricted.
Therefore, a major element of the TAMP will be focussed on the development of
the bridgeworks programme, recognising the overall societal value of these
structures.
Policy TAMP3: To maintain bridges and other structures to ensure the safe
passage of people and goods on the highway and rights of
way network.
Policy TAMP4: To review the current provision of crossing points on the
River Severn through Worcestershire and identify
improvements to those crossing points to ensure efficiency
of movement across the County.
Policy TAMP 5: To adopt the recommendations of the Code of Practice
“Management of Highway Structures” and achieve
milestone 3 compliance by 2009
4.12.2.6 Streetlighting
Overview
The importance of public lighting operation and maintenance to the integrated
transport network agenda, to public amenity and safety, to crime reduction and
fear of crime, has never been more widely recognised. The inevitable
consequences of significant under-investment over many years are an
increasingly visible deterioration in the infrastructure. An increased programme
of investment in public lighting maintenance will help to address this decline.
Worcestershire has recognised the Community safety aspect of lighting by
making this issue a high priority in its Corporate Plan.
New and replacement lighting schemes are normally designed to the appropriate
part of BS EN 13201. The exact category of lighting is carefully selected for each
scheme, bearing in mind the diverse nature of Worcestershire’s environment.
214

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Energy / Environmental Issues
In designing new lighting schemes, every effort is made to minimise the
environmental impact of the lighting. Whilst best practice in design, and
advanced luminaries technology is used to achieve these objectives, the desired
benefits of lighting must still be achieved. Also developments in technology are
constantly monitored with the objective of providing, and then implementing, cost
effective technology to reduce the overall lighting electricity load. This will in turn
limit unnecessary CO 2 emissions.
Asset replacement
Worcestershire has approximately 51,000 lighting columns across the highway
and footway network. If a service life of 30 years is to be achieved, around 1,700
of these columns should be replaced each year (although there will however be
considerable variation between years to reflect the variation in numbers of
columns installed over time – for example, in Redditch a large number of
streetlights were installed over a relatively short time period as part of the New
Town expansion programme).
The County has delivered a budget restricted column replacement programme
whereby some of the column stock has been renewed, but at a rate lower than
that described above. This has meant that in excess of 8,700 columns are
currently beyond their design life and require replacing during the LTP2 period.
In order to address this backlog approximately 1,950 columns per annum should
be replaced over the next 5 years, as illustrated in the graph below. To achieve
this target, a budget of approximately £2 million per annum would be required,
215

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
which again cannot be met from the Structural Maintenance budget allocation
without there being a major impact upon other service delivery.
The TAMP will therefore need to identify a realistic way in which this challenge
can be met.
Lighting Columns >30 Years Old
12000
10000
8000
8710 8938 9031 9236 9633
6000
4000
2000
0
Replacement columns over 5 year programme
1950 no per annum
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Column >30yrs old if no replacement undertaken
Replacement level if over age stock to be replaced in 5 years
Number of overage columns if replacement programme adopted
Policy TAMP 6: To maintain street lighting to a high standard to ensure
personal security and safety for all travellers and to
minimise the environmental impact of street lighting in the
form of light pollution and energy use.
4.12.2.7 Road Signs / Markings / Street Furniture
Overview
The provision of road signs, carriageway markings and other associated street
furniture is a critical part of ensuring that the highway and footway networks are
safe and easy to user. Motorists, cyclists and pedestrians alike all need clear
guidance on how to reach destinations, as well as clear warning of potential
hazards.
Therefore it is recognized that the provision of signs, markings and street
furniture to the standards set in current guidance will continue to be a major
element of the management of the transportation network.
Street Clutter
• The impact that road signs, markings, and other street furniture items
have upon the environment has, however, been recognised in campaigns
launched in 2004 by English Heritage and the Council for the Preservation
of Rural England (CPRE) to reduce street clutter. Generally, these items
have been installed to address a road safety or a traffic management
need. Design standards for highways often require a significant level of
signing to be installed to comply with regulations and cover safety issues.
216

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
However, often old signing is not reviewed to assess whether it is still necessary,
and when maintenance works are required the old signs or road markings are
generally replaced without questioning the need for them. Processes within the
TAMP will address this problem by making review of street furniture an important
stage of the highway maintenance process.
The County Council will also seek to identify opportunities to develop pilot
projects whereby road signs, markings and other street furniture are minimized or
even entirely removed, and the position monitored to assess the impact upon
road accident patterns, pedestrian and driver behavior, and vehicle speeds.
One possible location for such a pilot is the old A44, now the B4084, linking Eve
sham with M5 Junction 7 via Pershore. The attractiveness of this location would
be the ability to test this minimalist approach on a section of road including a
market town high street and a number of smaller villages.
Policy TAMP7: To review signing, road markings and other street furniture
as part of any major maintenance scheme to minimize street
clutter and improve the environment within local
communities and in rural areas.
Policy TAMP8: To undertake a pilot project to reduce street clutter along
the B4084 (old A44) route between Eve sham and the M5
Junction 7 to permit an assessment of the safety impact of
street clutter minimisation to be assessed.
4.12.2.8 New Development
Overview
New development has a major impact upon the transportation network through
the generation of additional trips. This applies to all types of land use, and the
preceding sections of the strategy have highlighted the major land use changes
that are currently identified throughout Worcestershire. The County Council will
working with developers, Local Planning Authorities and other public and private
sector partners to ensure that the transport impact of all new development is
properly considered at all stages of the planning process.
Transportation Design Guide
This will be achieved through the processes outlined in the County Council’s
Transportation Design Guide. This is programmed for revision during 2006, as
current County guidance is outdated and does not properly reflect Government
guidance.
The Design Guide will set out the County Council’s expectations in terms of the
following:
Where a development proposal will have a significant impact upon the transport
network, or will have a direct impact on the LTP2 strategy, then an appropriate
financial contribution will be expected to tackle a specific problem, or to assist
with the implementation of the LTP2 strategy. In particular, this approach will
apply in the following situations:
217

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Where a development will place additional traffic onto any part of the
highway network identified as being congested;
• Where a development will result in additional traffic passing through an
identified accident cluster site
• Where a development will generate additional travel demand that will put
additional pressure onto existing passenger transport services, or could
link to LTP2 proposals to improve passenger transport services and
facilities
• Where measures proposed under a Travel Plan for a development will
support the implementation of sustainable travel initiatives identified in the
LTP2 strategy, such as cycling, walking and Travel Plan projects.
• Where a development could place greater pressure onto sections of the
transportation network identified as being sub-standard through the
Transport Asset Management Plan.
The design guide will set out all processes to be followed in meeting this
approach.
Policy TAMP9: To revise the County Council’s Transportation Design
Guide to set out clearly to developers the requirements in
relation to meeting the transportation impact of new
developments.
Policy TAMP10: To work with developers, Local Planning Authorities and
other public and private sector organizations to ensure that
the transport impact of new development is properly
assessed at all stages of the planning process, and that
appropriate transport strategies are put in place and funded
for each development which are compatible with the LTP2
strategy.
Policy TAMP11: To ensure that funding to support the LTP2 strategy is
secured from developments where clear links are
demonstrated between the travel demand generated by that
development proposal and the schemes and strategies
outlined within LTP2.
218

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
219

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The implementation of the strategy outlined in the preceding chapter will depend
upon the availability of funding and the deliverability of individual schemes. This
chapter sets out how the delivery of the LTP2 strategy will be managed by the
County Council, including the identification of funding sources, identification and
mitigation of risks, the Council’s project management approach, and the expected
input from those organisations identified as major partners in the delivery of
individual schemes or the full strategy.
These issues are brought together in the LTP2 Implementation Plan, which is
included as Appendix Three.
The sources of funding available for LTP2 are outlined below, and can be
summarised as:
• LTP2 Integrated Transport Block allocation
• LTP2 Structural Maintenance Block allocation
• LTP2 Road Safety Planning Guideline
• De-trunking Grant
• Worcestershire County Council capital and revenue budgets
• Contributions from District Councils
• Other Third Party contributions (e.g. Highways Agency, Network Rail)
• Developer funding
• Other Government Funding (e.g. Sustainable Town Demonstration Project)
• Major Scheme funding
The Implementation Plan clearly sets out those funding sources and partners that
are relevant to each individual project contained within LTP2. Major risks to
delivery of these projects are also outlined, and these are also summarised
below.
5.2 LTP2 FUNDING – PLANNING GUIDELINES
5.2.1 Indicative Allocations
In December 2005, the Government announced the local transport capital
settlement for 2006/07. This settlement included planning guidelines for the
Integrated Transport block for the remaining years of the LTP2 period, whilst
planning guidelines for the Structural Maintenance block had previously been
issued in December 2004. For Worcestershire, the allocations are as follows.
Category 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 Total
Integrated £4.081 £4.399 £4.845 £5.325 £5.842 £24.492
Transport
Maintenance £8.696 £7.993 £8.392 £8.812 £9.252 £43.145
Road Safety £1.392 £1.442 £1.447 £1.425 £5.707
220

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
This sets out clearly the budget limits within which the LTP2 must deliver.
5.2.2 Integrated Transport Block
The Integrated Transport block refers to investment in new transport
infrastructure, from a bus stop to a new road. Schemes that require more than
£5 million of LTP2 funding will be regarded as a Major Scheme, and a separate
funding process applies as described below.
5.2.3 Structural Maintenance Block
The Structural Maintenance block refers to the maintenance of existing transport
infrastructure. For 2006/07, the Government has accepted bids for funding for
major bridgeworks projects at the following locations:
• A451 Stourport-on-Severn
• A449 Powick New Bridge
In addition, £593,845 of additional support for capital maintenance work on
recently de-trunked roads has been granted to the County Council for the A38.
5.2.4 Road Safety Planning Guideline
In December 2005, Government completed a review of the funding arrangements
for Safety Camera Partnerships, and announced that, from 2007/08, safety
camera activities are to be integrated into the wider road safety delivery process.
This will result in the ending of the current funding arrangement for safety
cameras whereby funding is made available from central Government through
ring-fencing of fines revenue. From 2007/08, funding will be integrated with the
LTP process.
Nationally, £440 million is being made available for road safety activity for the
period 2007-11, with £5.707 million being provisionally allocated for
Worcestershire. Of this figure, 18% represents capital expenditure and 82%
revenue expenditure, and the funding takes the form of a direct grant.
Within Worcestershire, it is intended that this funding will be used to enhance the
road safety strategy outlined within this LTP by:
• Support speed enforcement activity within Worcestershire, including the provision
of safety cameras where appropriate.
• Supporting the review of speed management policies and the implementation of
physical measures as part of the revised policy.
• Enhance road safety education, training and promotion activity in partnership with
current Safety Camera Partnership member organisations.
Priorities for investment will be identified in close consultation with partner
organisations within the Safety Camera Partnership. The availability of this
funding will not result in a reduction of funding for road safety through the main
LTP2 Integrated Transport block, reflecting the County Council’s view that
continuing casualty reduction is a priority area.
221

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.2.5 Indicative Five Year Programme
Table 5.1 sets out the budget allocation for each main strategy area for the LTP2
period. This allocation is based on the indicative budget given above, and has
been distributed to generally reflect the relative priority accorded to each strategy
area during the public consultation process. It is, of course, difficult to precisely
quantify the exact spread of expenditure against these strategy areas as many
projects will have benefits across more than one area. A School Travel Plan, for
example, may improve accessibility to a school as well as improving safety.
Some projects will draw on funding from more than one strategy area. For
example, the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town project will identify measures to
improve the walk, cycle and public transport infrastructure within the city and
these will be funded from the overall walking, cycling, rail strategy, intelligent
transport systems or Integrated Passenger Transport budgets.
5.2.6 County Council Funding
The main LTP2 programme is supplemented by major investment from the
County Council’s overall budget, and in 2006/07 this will approach £35 million.
This investment is directed towards the maintenance of transport services, with
highways maintenance and the support of passenger transport, education
transport and social needs transport being the main items.
The following table summarises the transport-related items within the 2006/07
budget approved by the County Council in February 2006.
Item Budget (£’000’s) Notes
Bypasses 189 Compensation payments etc.
for Broadway and Wyre
Piddle Bypasses
Bus Challenge Projects 229 Schemes in Malvern,
Redditch and Wyre Forest
Upton Viaduct 85
Maintenance Depots 700 Maintenance
Rights of Way 260 Structures
Class 1 & 2 Footways 250 Additional funding voted to
footways
Highways Revenue Budget 15,207 To cover routine
maintenance, lighting,
bridges, environmental works
(verges / trees), safety
fencing, traffic management,
drainage and gullies.
Passenger Transport 4,760 Net costs of supporting and
developing public transport
services
Home to School and College 11,836 Children’s services budget for
Transport
Adult & Community Services
Transport
education transport
1,311 Transport needs of older
people, the physically
disabled and the mentally
disabled
222

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Table 5.1: 2006-11 Funding Allocations based on Planning Guideline
Budgets
STRATEGY 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
5 YEAR
TOTAL
Accessibility Strategy
Integrated Passenger Transport
Strategy
2000 1200 1500 2350 2000 9050
Rail Strategy 80 50 300 430
Worcestershire Parkway 1250 1250
Rights of Way Improvement Plan 50 100 150 100 400
Sustainable Travel Initiatives 900 800 900 1100 900 4600
TOTAL 2980 2100 2500 3900 4250 15730
Congestion
Intelligent Transport Systems 300 335 500 400 1535
A4440 Worcester Southern Link
Road
130 1220 840 (3250) 2190
Market Towns Transport Initiative 250 500 750
Bordesley Bypass 500 250 750
TOTAL 430 1470 1675 500 400 4475
Safety
Casualty Reduction Schemes 610 660 600 840 650 3360
TOTAL 610 660 600 840 650 3360
Air Quality
Bewdley 15 110 125
Kidderminster / Bromsgrove 40 475 515
TOTAL 15 110 40 475 640
Other
Minor Schemes 26 29 25 25 25 130
Street Clutter Initiative 10 25 22 57
Monitoring 20 20 20 20 20 100
TOTAL 46 59 70 45 67 287
INTEGRATED TRANSPORT
TOTAL
4081 4399 4845 5325 5842 24492
Asset Management
Structural Maintenance 6236 6393 6792 7212 7652 34285
Bridges 2360 1500 1500 1500 1500 8360
Streetlighting 100 100 100 100 100 500
STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE
TOTAL
8696 7993 8392 8812 9252 43145
ADDITIONAL LTP2 FUNDING
A38 De-Trunking 593 593
A449/A456 De-Trunking
Road Safety Enhancement 1392 1442 1448 1425 5707
ADDITIONAL LTP2 TOTAL 593 1392 1442 1448 1425 6300
OVERALL LTP2 TOTAL 13370 13784 14679 15585 16519 74530
Note: Figures in red relate to alternative spend that is currently uncommitted.
223

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.2.7 Supplementary Funding
In addition, all LTP2 strategies will be supported by funding from other sources,
including developer funding, partnership funding from other public and private
sector agencies, and Prudential Borrowing by the County Council where
necessary and justified. It is clear that the proposed Park and Ride facilities that
form a major element of the Project Express project cannot be funded from the
Integrated Transport allocation without having a major impact upon the overall
LTP2 strategy, as each Park and Ride site is likely to cost around £2.5 million to
construct. Therefore, alternative funding will be sought for the Park and Ride
sites, with the LTP2 allocation for Project Express being used to support the
implementation of bus priority and other bus infrastructure improvements within
the city.
The following table summarises the main sources of supplementary funding
available to support the LTP2 strategy:
Funding Source
Amount (as at December Notes
2005) (£’000’s)
Developer funding (S106) 885 Covers 17 developments –
funding held by County Council
Developer funding (S38 / S40 /
S278)
450 Covers 48 developments –
funding held by County Council
Trust Funds 219 Trust funds relating to specific
bridges
Redditch Borough Council 8,400 Capital funding towards A441
Bordesley Bypass
Abbey Stadium Development 1,250 Developer contribution towards
A441 Bordesley Bypass
(dependent upon Abbey
Stadium proposal securing
planning approval)
Worcester Sustainable Travel
Town
3,500 DfT grant for Sustainable Travel
Town project covering 2004-09
period
Advantage West Midlands 935 Grant funding towards support
of rural transport initiatives
controlled through
Worcestershire Accessibility
Partnership (3 year period)
Developer funding (District
Councils)
2,061 75 developments across the
County
District Councils –
Concessionary Travel Schemes
4,000 District Council support for
concessionary travel schemes
Parish Councils 100 Contribution towards the Parish
lengthsman scheme
5.2.8 Prioritisation of Schemes
The relatively limited funding available within the LTP2 allocation has meant that
a degree of prioritisation has been required when developing this programme.
This has been carried out using a broad framework appraisal, identifying how
each strategy area or project contributes towards the following:
224

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Contribution to the Regional Spatial Strategy
• Contribution to the Local Area Agreement / Worcestershire Partnership
• Efficiency Assessment – value for money and deliverability / risk
• Contribution to the Shared Priorities
• Political and Partnership Commitment
• Level of funding requirement / partnership funding availability
The details of this analysis are included in Appendix Four and are summarised in
the following table:
Notes
Funding
CPA
Political
Partnership
Statutory
Shared
Priorities
Efficiency
LAA
RSS
STRATEGY
Integrated
Passenger
Transport
Strategy
H H M H M H H H H Covers P&R,
bus priority,
integrated
passenger
transport
Rail Strategy M M M H L M H L L Contribution to
rail projects
Worcestershire
Parkway
H M M M H H H M H Contribution to
scheme
ROWIP L M H M H H M H M ROWIP
implementation
Sustainable
Travel Initiatives
M H H H H H H H H Covers Travel
Plans, walk,
cycle and freight
ITS M H H H H H H H H Covers UTC
systems and
RTPI
Worcester
Southern Link
Road
Market towns
transport
initiative
Bordesley By-
Pass
Road Safety
Strategy
Air Quality
Management
Areas
H L M M L H H L H Junction
improvements
on the A4440
M H M H L H H H H Evesham and
Pershore
market towns
improvements
M M M M L H H L H Connected to
Abbey Stadium
development
L H H M H H H H H Road Safety
schemes
implementation
M M H M H H H M H Improve air
quality at three
known sites.
Minor schemes L M M M L M H L L Other schemes
Street clutter L L M L L H M L L Improve road
signing at trial
location
Monitoring
strategy
L L H L L L M H L Monitoring of
success of LTP.
KEY:H = High; M = Medium; L = Low
225

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.3 TRANSPORT INNOVATION FUND
The Government has also indicated a willingness to support Authorities that are
seeking to implement challenging schemes to tackle local congestion through
innovative demand management measures and/or quality bus contracts. This
support will be through a specific Transport Innovation Fund (TIF), with the
prospect of initial funds during the first 3 years of LTP2 for feasibility work, and
increased funds for implementation during the latter stages of LTP2.
Worcestershire County Council submitted an expression of interest for TIF
funding for Project Express proposals in Worcester, but this was unsuccessful.
The Department for Transport (DfT) issued further guidance on TIF in January
2006, setting out the criteria fir future bidding rounds in 2006 and 2007. It is clear
from the guidance that the emphasis will remain on schemes that will tackle
congestion through the introduction of some form of Road User Charging.
Two of the projects that secured initial TIF funding are in the West Midlands. The
County Council will closely monitor the progress of the studies proposed to
investigate road user charging potential in the West Midlands conurbation and in
Shrewsbury. In particularly, the Shrewsbury proposal appears to be investigating
Road User Charging in a similar situation to that experienced within Worcester,
and the conclusions of the study are likely to be particularly pertinent to
Worcestershire.
Whilst Worcestershire was unsuccessful in its initial bid for TIF to support the
Project Express initiative within Worcester, the Council remains interested in
bidding within future rounds. Further bids are still likely to be based upon
Worcester, and consideration is being given to potential schemes that might
emerge from the Worcester transportation study. Options for the inclusion of
demand management measures within the city centre, and how these may meet
Governments requirements in respect to TIF bids, will be considered as part of
the study.
Such a bid could potentially involve the use of demand management measures
such as full integration of city centre parking charges, Park and Ride charges,
passenger transport fares and / or road user charging to influence travel demand
for journeys into the city, which allied to the provision of additional capacity
across the city centre could ultimately result in a car-free central area within
Worcester.
226

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.4 MAJOR SCHEMES
5.4.1 Major Schemes included in LTP2
LTP2 guidance indicates that funding will not be available for major schemes,
over and above those already provisionally accepted (of which there are none in
Worcestershire). Within the LTP2 Implementation Plan, the following schemes
have an overall capital cost in excess of £5 million:
5.4.1.1 Worcestershire Parkway Station
This scheme has an estimated capital cost of £12.2 million (2006 prices).
However, the scheme will only be delivered through a partnership with rail
industry organisations, and that the bulk of the funding will be found from non-
LTP sources. Accordingly, the LTP2 contribution to the scheme has been set at
£1.25 million, with the potential to increase this sum to £3.25 million if the scheme
is combined with a Park and Ride interchange for the South-eastern approach to
Worcester.
5.4.1.2 A441 Bordesley Bypass
This dual carriageway road is estimated to cost approximately £10 million, with
the majority of this funding coming from third party sources. Redditch Borough
Council has approved a funding contribution of £8.4 million, whilst the proposed
developer of the commercial leisure development at Abbey Stadium has agreed
to a Section 106 contribution of £1.25 million. To ensure that the new road is
built to the appropriate standard, the County Council has agreed to make up any
shortfall in scheme costs, up to a maximum of £1 million, from the LTP2 budget.
5.4.2 Major Scheme bids to be developed within LTP2
The County Council is aware of the need to continue to identify potential major
schemes during the LTP2 period to tackle identified problems, and there are two
specific areas where major scheme funding bids are likely to be developed during
the LTP2 period. These are:
5.4.2.1 Worcester Transportation Strategy
As described earlier, a transportation study will be completed by 2007 to identify the
most appropriate transport strategy for Worcester to meet the demands on this subregional
centre. Whatever the form of this strategy, it is anticipated that investment
exceeding £5 million will be required, and therefore that a major scheme funding bid
will be necessary. This will be further developed following the submission of the RSS
review to central government in 2007, and will result in a bid for funding to permit
implementation of the preferred strategy in LTP3 (2011-16). As reported above, the
County Council will consider the preparation of a bid for TIF support for this study as
it is considered that it potentially meets the criteria set for the TIF.
227

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.4.2.2 Wyre Forest Transportation Strategy
The transportation study proposed for the Wyre Forest area is also likely to result
in the identification of a transport strategy that will cost more then £5 million to
implement, which will require a Major Scheme bid for funding to be submitted.
Again, it is intended that this strategy will be delivered during the LTP3 period
(2011-16).
This study will include a further review of the Stourport Relief Road, which has a
cost estimate of £47 million. This scheme has been included within the Regional
Prioritisation Framework for transport projects, and whilst it is been included in
Band 2 of the framework, it is clear that funding for the scheme would not be
available until the 2001-14 period at earliest. Therefore, it is logical to review the
status of this scheme within the Wyre Forest study.
5.4.2.3 River Bridges
It is apparent from the information provided within the Transportation Asset
Management Plan chapter that a problem exists within Worcestershire relating to
the level of service offered by the existing bridges over the River Severn.
Movement within the County is particularly vulnerable to problems with these
bridges and those across the Rivers Avon and Teme.
It is known that major maintenance works will be required during the LTP2 period
at a number of key bridges across the County. It is likely that a bid for major
scheme funding will be developed for a bridge improvement programme to
ensure that the crossings over the Rivers Severn, Avon and Teme are capable of
providing an improved level of service, and that maintenance works on those
crossings can be properly co-ordinated with other works. This bid will be
developed as part of the preparation of the Transportation Asset Management
Plan.
5.4.3 Risk Management
The management of risk is an increasingly important element of the Council’s
processes for the delivery of services, including strategies such as the LTP2.
Key risks associated with each strategy within LTP2 have been considered as
part of the LTP2 Implementation Plan.
The most important risks, along with measures to manage those risks, are
highlighted below:
5.4.3.1 Bordesley Bypass
A £750,00 contribution has been included within the LTP2 Implementation Plan
towards the cost of constructing this Bypass, although the County Council
contribution may rise to a maximum of £1 million if required. This has been
programmed for payment in 2007/08 and 2008/09, to link with the scheme’s
construction programme should the Abbey Stadium development secure planning
approval. Whilst the County Council is a minority funding partner of the scheme,
it will play a major role in the delivery of the scheme.
228

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
A planning application was submitted for the scheme in December 2005, with
determination of the application expected in Spring 2006. Whilst there is a strong
probability that the Bypass will be granted planning approval, as the scheme
previously gained approval in 1995 and consultation with the local community has
indicated strong support for the Bypass, the majority of the funding is coming
from Redditch Borough Council and the developer of the Abbey Stadium
commercial leisure development.
This development was the subject of a planning Public Inquiry in November 2005.
The outcome of this Inquiry will not be known until Spring 2006, and therefore the
LTP2 Implementation Plan shows this funding contribution as an alternative item.
This means that should the development gain planning approval, and the Bypass
therefore secure the overall funding package for it to proceed, then there will
need to be a re-distribution of the LTP2 allocation to permit inclusion of the
funding for Bordesley Bypass over the financial years 2007/08 and 2008/09.
The LTP2 allocation for the scheme would be met by re-allocating funds from
other congestion-related schemes, such as the A4440 Worcester Southern Link
Road and Evesham High Street enhancement, with the impact of delaying the
completion of these projects by a further year.
5.4.3.2 Worcestershire Parkway
It is clear that the £3.25 million allocation towards the Worcestershire Parkway
station and/or the Integrated Passenger Transport Interchange near Junction 7
programmed for 2010/11 is also potentially at risk, as the funding package will
depend upon a robust business case being made, and ongoing uncertainty over
rail industry funding, structures, franchises etc. mean that the delivery of the
scheme within the LTP2 period cannot be guaranteed.
If the scheme slips, then funding will be reallocated to support the implementation
of the improvement of the A4440 Worcester Southern Link through the
construction of additional junction improvements on this congested route.
5.4.3.3 A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road
Major investment is programmed in a series of junction improvements to the
Worcester Southern Link Road. This package involves some improvements that
will require land acquisition, and possible planning approval.
To mitigate the risk involved in this project, it has been decided to concentrate
LTP2 funding initially on those improvements that will involve least land
acquisition, and which can be classed as improvements within the highway
boundary, thereby removing the need for planning approval. These are the
proposed improvements at the Powick and Whittington roundabouts.
Funding will only be allocated to construct the other more complex junction
improvements at the Ketch and Norton roundabouts if it becomes clear that this
approach will be compatible with the conclusions of the Worcester study, and if
other elements of the proposed LTP2 programme slip (as noted above).
Therefore, every effort will be made to ensure that tackling the congestion
problems on the A4440 involves a minimum risk strategy that will have the least
impact possible upon the travelling public.
229

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.4.3.4 Project Express
The Park and Ride elements of the Project Express proposals involve securing
planning approval, and experience during the first LTP period has shown that this
can be a contentious process. This introduces an element of risk to achieving
delivery of the Park and Ride scheme proposed for the Rugby Club site in
2006/07, due to the tight timetable involved to complete statutory procedures and
construction of the scheme.
Slippage of funding will be re-allocated to bring forward those elements of the
Worcester Southern Link Road improvements that can be delivered without the
need for land-take or planning approval, to support Sustainable Travel measures,
and potentially to support bus purchase and other passenger transport measures.
5.4.3.5 Other Schemes
In general, it is considered that the wider strategy areas that comprise a series of
smaller projects, such as Sustainable Travel Initiatives or Road Safety, will be
less susceptible to risk of non-delivery. The objective with these programmes will
be to ensure that a sufficient number of schemes are developed to allow a
degree of flexibility within the delivery programme. This will ensure that should a
scheme prove more or less costly than anticipated, or should a scheme have to
be dropped from the programme due to specific difficulties, there will always be
other schemes that can be advanced to take its place.
However, with limited funding available for the delivery of sustainable travel
initiatives, the main risk with this programme is ensuring that satisfactory results
can be achieved with that funding. Crucially, ensuring that adequate staffing
resources to deliver schemes against a limited budget will be important.
5.4.3.6 Staff Resources
The general risk that could impact on the delivery of the LTP2 programme is the
scarcity of suitably qualified staff in the engineering and transport planning fields.
A national shortfall of graduates in these areas is well recognised, and
Worcestershire’s locations means that it is in a competitive market when it comes
to recruiting such staff.
The Council recognises these issues and is introducing recruitment and training
schemes designed to attract suitable staff to Worcestershire to minimise the risk
of scheme delivery being adversely affected by staff shortages. The partnering
arrangements with term consultants and Contractors are also designed to enable
secondment of staff where necessary to meet short-term staffing needs.
5.4.3.7 Financial Resources
It is recognised that the LTP2 Planning Guidelines for Integrated Transport and
Structural Maintenance will need to be enhanced as far as possible to ensure the
maximum effectiveness of the LTP2 strategy. Without the securing of additional
funding to supplement the LTP2 allocation, it is clear that there will be a risk of
non-delivery of the LTP2 objectives.
230

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Therefore, the County Council will work with LTP2 partners to ensure that every
opportunity to secure additional funding for the transport measures included in
the LTP2 strategy will be rigorously pursued
5.4.3.8 Summary
The table below summarises the main risks to LTP2 delivery outlined above, with
strategies to minimise those risks included alongside contingency measures.
Strategy Area Nature of Risk Contingency Measures
A441 Bordesley
Bypass
Abbey Stadium
Worcestershire
Parkway
development does not
secure planning approval
– resulting in loss of third
party funding
Station proposal does
not secure rail industry
support – resulting in
failure to deliver scheme
A4440
Failure to secure
Worcester necessary planning
Southern Link approvals, land
acquisition or Side Road
Orders
Project Express Delivery of Park and
Ride sites slips through
delays in securing
planning approval
Other Schemes Problems of managing
large programmes of
small schemes results in
under-spend
Staff Resources Inadequate staff
resources to deliver the
LTP2 implementation
plan
Financial
Resources
Inadequate financial
resources to deliver the
LTP2 strategy
Level of Risk
High Medium Low
Funding gap would be too great to
bridge from LTP2, therefore LTP2
allocation re-allocated to other
schemes
WCC would not be able to deliver
scheme itself due to lack of powers to
work on rail network and size of
funding gap – therefore LTP2
contribution would be re-allocated to
other schemes supporting
Worcester’s sub-regional role
Initial priority will be given to delivering
junction improvements requiring
minimal land-take, and with least
impact in planning terms on
neighbouring properties.
Funding re-allocated to other LTP2
strategies that support Worcester subregional
role or that will contribute to
meeting bus patronage targets
Through appropriate project
management, ensure sufficient
schemes developed to cover any
slippage of individual schemes
Seek to ensure adequate supply of
suitable staff through recruitment and
training package, and where
shortages do occur provide cover
through the partnering arrangements
with consultant and contractors
Work with partners to maximise third
party funding, especially funding
secured from development
231

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.5 SCHEME DELIVERY
Background
Providing a better service to the people of Worcestershire through
innovative business processes and collaborative working
Worcestershire County Council has made a conscious effort during the first LTP
period to introduce better project management principles as part of the Council’s
culture. This followed the completion of a number of Best Value Reviews during
the first LTP period on a range of transport service areas, which highlighted
problems associated with scheme delivery.
The Council recognises the fact that delivering a complex programme of work
such as that contained within the LTP2 strategy requires a high level of project
management skills amongst the staff, both within the Council and in delivery
partners, charged with delivering that programme.
The LTP2 strategy contains a large number of projects, largely due to the high
number of smaller schemes contained within the broader strategy areas. The
strategy includes a few larger projects such as Park and Ride and bus priority
schemes proposed as part of Project Express, the Worcestershire Parkway
station and the junction improvements on the A4440. These large projects are
complemented by a large number of footway and cycleway schemes, crossing
points or casualty reduction schemes that are in themselves relatively small
projects.
However, many of the preparatory works associated with a scheme, such as
consultation with the public, statutory undertakers, and other bodies, take just as
long to complete for a smaller scheme as for a major scheme. Therefore, the
project management process needs to be equally robust whatever the scale of
scheme being delivered.
A number of factors have influenced the development of the partnering
arrangements and project management structures described below. These
include
• Increased expectations from the public
• Meeting CPA and Best Value objectives
• Aiming for continuous improvement
• Achieving “Gershon” efficiencies
• Taking account of the Latham and Egan principles regarding the way in which
we work
5.5.1 Partnering Arrangements
There are a number of partners involved in the delivery of a LTP2 scheme, and
these can be summarised as follows:
232

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
• Worcestershire County Council – responsibility for the management of the
highways network and for overall transport strategy, including scheme
identification, LTP2 strategy overview, commissioning body, management of
funds
• Other Partners – for some schemes, there will be other partners who may
have assisted with scheme identified and who may be providing funding
towards the scheme. These will often be District Councils or other public
bodies.
• Design Consultant – Worcestershire County Council has a Contract with
Halcrow for the provision of highway design services and other specialist
support, such as transport modelling, environmental planning, and structural
engineering advice. This role extends to taking the lead in public consultation
on some schemes, as well as representing the County Council at meetings
when appropriate. The current Contract was awarded to Halcrow in April
2005 and runs for 8 years with options for further extension. Therefore, it is
most likely that Halcrow will remain the term design consultant for the entire
LTP2 period. The Contract has been set up to promote close working
relationships between Halcrow and County Council staff.
• Term Maintenance Contractor – the County Council awarded a new Term
Maintenance Contract to Ringway in 2005, with the Contract becoming
operational in October 2005. Ringway are responsible for delivering the
maintenance works programme, including winter maintenance duties and all
aspects of highway and footway maintenance. The Contract has again been
set up to promote close working relationships between County Council and
Ringway staff, and this includes the co-location of staff from the two
organisations.
• Integrated Transport Schemes Contractor – to improve delivery of LTP
schemes during the first LTP period, the County Council elected to minimise
time spent on the preparation and award of Contracts for individual schemes
by awarding an overall Contract for LTP Integrated Transport schemes. This
Contract will be renewed in 2007 for a period of four years, with an option to
extend for a further four years. The simplification of Contract arrangements,
and the continuing nature of the LTP2 strategy with a larger number of
smaller scale schemes, means that value for money will again be sought
through the re-letting of this Contract. The major benefits have been the
establishment of a close working relationship with one Contractor on small
schemes of a similar nature, which have resulted in a more efficient process
being provided.
• Streetlighting Contract – the other main Contract that the County Council in
regard of delivery of the LTP2 strategy is the streetlighting contract. This was
renewed in 2004 with Pirelli securing the Contract for a second term. As with
other Contracts operated by the Council, a close working relationship is
encouraged between Pirelli and County Council staff.
233

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
5.5.2 Project Management
Scheme delivery is achieved by Worcestershire Highways, a partnership of the
County Council and term contractors under the NEC form of contract. This form
of contract is promoted by the Office of Government Commerce as satisfying the
“Excellence in Construction” (AEC) principles. The partnership gained
Constructing Excellence Demonstration Project status in October 2005.
Project management is achieved using PRINCE2 processes. Client and designer
staff have been trained in PRINCE2, with 14 staff achieving foundation level and
6 becoming PRINCE2 Practitioners.
The “joined-up” way of working makes best use of limited resources and ensures
that the partnership adopt a holistic approach to training. Training days for the
whole of the Worcestershire Highways team have enabled the diverse teams to
come together, appreciate where, how and when they can contribute to excellent
services, and facilitate the clear communication so crucial to successful
operations. The Worcestershire Highways team comprises:
• County Council client officers;
• Term Consultant, and;
• Contractors (Term Maintenance, Integrated Transport Schemes
and Streetlighting Contracts):
234

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Business processes have been put in place through the new term contracts to
promote partnering, setting out processes clearly within a handbook available to
all staff at all partners, introduction automatic invoicing and joint accounting
practices, and streamlining the delivery process.
Project teams also review what went well and what went poorly with all schemes
undertaken by the Partnership, with the objective of properly learning from the
experience and applying the lessons learnt to future projects.
Benefits from these working practices have been identified as:
• Improved business systems
• Ongoing relationships and better integration of teams
• Improved productivity
• Greater cost and programme predictability
• More opportunity for learning and continuous improvement
• Greater public satisfaction with the service
235

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
236

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
6 MONITORING
237

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
6.1 TARGETS AND INDICATORS
The monitoring strategy sets out how the County Council will measure progress
with the delivery of LTP2 by using a series of targets and indicators. These can
be grouped into three broad categories:
• Mandatory Indicators reported as Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI)
• Mandatory Indicators required by Government under LTP2 Guidance
• Local Indicators that are relevant to specific areas of the LTP2 strategy and /
or to the Regional Spatial Strategy
The indicators included within the strategy are intended to clearly link to the
overall LTP2 objectives, and the targets set for each indicator have been carefully
considered to ensure that they are meaningful for specific policy areas. Two
targets have generally been set for each indicator, as described below:
• Satisfactory Targets – targets that are realistically achievable given available
resources allocated through the LTP2 settlement
• Stretch Targets – targets that will prove challenging to meet given available
resources, but which if achieved will give significant benefits to that specific
LTP2 strategy area
The need to allocate adequate resources for monitoring is recognised, and
accordingly a small proportion of the LTP2 Integrated Transport block has been
allocated for the Monitoring Strategy. This will complement resources already
available for monitoring from existing revenue budgets.
Appendix Six contains the full Monitoring Strategy including detailed information
on the reasons for choosing specific indicators, data collection methodology, the
role of individual partners where appropriate, the basis for the actual targets, and
the main risks associated with each target.
The indicators and targets are also summarised in the following table:
Ref.
BVPI
223
BVPI
224a
BVPI
224b
BVPI
99a
BVPI
99b
Performance Indicator
Baseline Satisfactory
Target
Year Data Year Data
LTP2 MANDATORY – BEST VALUE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Stretched
Target
Principal road condition 2005/06 7% 2010/11 4% 3%
Non-principal classified
road condition
Unclassified road
condition
Total killed or seriously
injured casualties
Child killed or seriously
injured casualties
2005/06 23% 2010/11 17% 16%
2004/05 20.33 2010/11 20.33 19.55
1994-98
2001-04
1994-98
2001-04
548
304
59
28
2010 283 255
2010 25 22
238

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Ref.
BVPI
99c
BVPI
102
BVPI
104
BVPI
187
Performance Indicator
Total slight casualties 1994-98
Public transport
patronage – millions of
trips
Satisfaction with local
bus services
Baseline Satisfactory
Target
Year Data Year Data
2001-04
2177
1996
Stretched
Target
2010 1921 1875
2003/04 13.6m 2010 13.7m 14.3m
2003/04 37% 2009/10 41% 45%
Footway condition 2003/04 60.22 2007/08 60 57
LTP 1a Accessibility –
Percentage of working
age population with
access (by bus) to a
major employment site
in 60 minutes (8am to
9am)
LTP 1b
LTP2
LTP3
LTP4
Accessibility – Number
of registered users of
Worcestershire car
share database
Change in area-wide
road traffic mileage
(annualised index)
Cycling trips annualised
index
Mode share of journeys
to school.
LTP5a Bus punctuality –
Percentage of buses
starting their route on
time
LTP5b Bus punctuality –
Percentage of buses on
time at intermediate
timing points
LTP8a
WCC 1
NO 2 Levels µg/m 3 at
AQMA’s
Welchgate (Bewdley)
Horsefair
(Kidderminster)
Junction1 M42
Number of school travel
plans/ Proportion of
state schools with an
approved Travel Plan
LTP2 MANDATORY
2005/06 81% 2010/11 81% 82%
2005/06 574 2010/11 3000 5000
2004 100 2010/11 117 100
2003/04 100 2010/11 100 130
To be set in 2006/07 once baseline data becomes
available
2005/06 86.7% 2010/11 96% 97%
2005/06 74.9% 2010/11 79% 85%
2003/04
55.66
61.79
47.7
REGIONAL INDICATORS
2010/11
40
40
40
2003/04 35/12% 2010/11 294/
100%
40
40
40
294/100% by
2009/10
239

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Ref.
WCC 2a
WCC 2b
WCC 3a
WCC 3b
WCC 4a
WCC 4b
WCC 5a
WCC 5b
Performance Indicator
Number of employers
that have adopted a
travel plan
Proportion of the
workforce that work in
organisations that have
committed to a travel
plan
Number of car parking
spaces at railway
stations
Park and ride for town
centre spaces
(permanent)
Percentage of the
population within 60
minutes (by bus) of a
major healthcare facility
including community
hospitals between
10:00hrs and 16:00hrs
Number of bus fleet
that are low floor
Baseline Satisfactory
Target
Year Data Year Data
LOCAL INDICATORS
Percentage Length of
Principal Road Network
where Strengthening
should be considered,
based on the length of
road meeting the
following criteria :-
Structural Condition
Index >= 70
Percentage Length of
the Non-Principal
Classified Road
Network that has
exceeded the point at
which surface or
structural repair of the
carriageway should be
considered, based on
the length of road
meeting any of the
following 3 criteria:
• Structural Condition
Index >= 85
• Wearing Course
Condition Index >= 60
• Edge Condition
Index >= 50
Stretched
Target
2003/04 30 2010/11 80 90
2003/04 5% 2010/11 20% 30%
2005 1171 2010/11 1561 1757
2003/04 450 2010/11 1050 1950
2005/06 65% 2010/11 80% 84%
2003/04 45 2008/09 60 65
2004/05 7.58 2008/09 7.58 5.97
2004/05 21.35 2008/09 21.35 20.51
240

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011
Ref.
WCC 6
WCC 7
Performance Indicator
Percentage of
Worcester journeys
made by walk, cycle
and bus (combined)
Congestion – journey
times (peak)
Baseline Satisfactory
Target
Year Data Year Data
Stretched
Target
2003/04 34% 2010/11 34% 41%
2005/06
am/pm
(minutes)
2010/11
A4440 Southern Link
(Worcester) eastbound
26/17.5
26/17.5
23.5/15.5
A4440 Southern Link
(Worcester) westbound
19/20.5
19/20.5
17/18.5
Resolution way to
Stourport Bridge
9.5
10
8.5
Stourport Bridge to
Resolution Way
10.5
11
9.5
WCC 8
WCC 9
WCC 10
Ease of use of rights of
way
Satisfaction with public
transport information all
users
Carbon Dioxide
emissions from traffic
2003/04 54% 2010/11 65% 67%
2003/04 24% 2009/10 39% 43%
2004/05 1.432
million
tonnes
2010/11 1.432
million
tonnes
1.380 million
tonnes
241

APPENDIX ONE – GOVERNMENT FEEDBACK
ON PROVISIONAL LTP2

GOVERNMENT FEEDBACK
Context
Greater linkage required between LTP2
strategy and strategic transport networks
More account needed of the transport
impacts of housing and employment
growth resulting from the Regional
Spatial Strategy
Analysis
No discussion of what the Council is
doing on a corporate level to examine its
own employees’ travel behaviour
No evidence of joint working with other
Sustainable Travel Towns
Avoid making assumptions / statements
that are not supported by evidence
More consideration needed of
environmental issues
WORCESTERSHIRE RESPONSE
Section 3.13 added to Chapter 3
outlining main issues on the strategic
road and rail networks, inland waterways
and air travel
Section 3.2 referring to Regional Spatial
Strategy has been strengthened, and
Section 3.5 expanded to cover the
Regional Housing Strategy in greater
detail. Many references to the need for
the Worcester transportation study and
Wyre Forest transportation study to firmly
identify the transport impact of major new
housing and employment sites
throughout the strategy
Section added to Employer Travel Plans
strategy (Section 4.2.13) covering
progress with the implementation of the
County Council’s Travel Plan, and
section (Section 4.5.3) added to the Air
Quality and Environment Strategy
outlining the County Council fleet
management and fuels policy
Additional text added to the Worcester
Sustainable Travel Town policy (Section
4.9.2) highlighting best practice work with
Peterborough and Darlington including
seminars etc.
Audit carried out by Integrated Transport
Planning Limited (ITP) as an
independent check to identify any
remaining instances
Strategic Environmental Assessment
section (section 3.10) updated and
extended. New Section (Section 4.5.4)
added to Air Quality and Environment
chapter including new policies on general
principles linking LTP2 scheme delivery
with SEA objectives

GOVERNMENT FEEDBACK
Maximising Value from Resources
Could be stronger on influencing travel
behaviour county-wide
More evidence needed to demonstrate
how Value for Money principles have
been applied to the spend programme
Little detailed consideration of what other
avenues being considered to level in
additional funding
Little direct consideration of the role of
revenue
Maximising the benefit of new or
upgraded infrastructure – how to
convince people to use networks
Involvement
How will County work with the bus sector
to achieve challenging bus patronage
targets
Little direct reference to stakeholders
such as Parish Councils, local business,
tourist organisations, or special interest
groups
WORCESTERSHIRE RESPONSE
Specific policies added to Walk and
Cycle strategies (Policies WALK2 and
CYC4) which cover promotion and
marketing of these modes, additional
information given on the marketing of
passenger transport (Policies IPT6 and
ITP7), and more detail given on road
safety education / publicity (Policies RS4
and RS5).
Framework appraisal carried out for
LTP2 programme outlining how priorities
have been identified – described in
Section 5.2 and Appendix 5.
Extra section on third party / other
funding sources added within Section
5.2. Also, clearer policies (TAMP9,
TAMP10 and TAMP11) added to cover
developer contributions to meeting the
LTP2 strategy.
Greater detail added on the role of
revenue funding in LTP2 delivery within
Section 5.2
See above – Policies WALK2, CYC4,
IPT6, IPT7, RS4 and RS5.
Targets have been reviewed following
Government advice and experience from
Project Express. Passenger Transport
section has been updated to reflect
Project Express approach to improving
passenger transport (Section 4.2.8).
Reference to partners has been included
where appropriate, especially in delivery
plan. Separate consultation report
produced as a sister document giving
detailed information on consultation
responses.

GOVERNMENT FEEDBACK
Performance Management
More explanation is needed to explain
how bus patronage target will be
achieved
More work is needed on risk
management
Detail is needed on what systems will be
employed to monitor target performance
and manage budgets
Priorities
Better developed accessibility strategy
required
Demonstrate that systems are in place to
monitor the progress that is expected
across the shared priorities
Some consideration of transport-related
noise issues and more on transport links
to healthier communities and measures
to help vulnerable road users
More detail is required to demonstrate
how the target of removing all 3 AQMAs
will be met
WORCESTERSHIRE RESPONSE
Bus patronage targets have been
reviewed as noted above
Section 5.5 added which details major
risks to delivery of the LTP2 strategy, and
outlines how these will be managed
Section 5.6 outlines approach to
Performance Management, whilst
Chapter 6 contains the monitoring
strategy.
Accessibility Strategy has been published
alongside the LTP2 strategy, and is
summarised in Section 4.2 of LTP2
Chapter 6 contains the Monitoring
Strategy.
Section 4.5.5 has been added to cover
transport-related noise, including Policy
NOI1. Section 3.9 and the Accessibility
Strategy refer to the links between
transport and health, whilst the
Accessibility Strategy and Road Safety
Strategy cover vulnerable road users.
Target removed following DfT guidance
from 6 January. NO2 levels now set as
targets for each AQMA. Detail already
contained on the Bewdley and
Kidderminster AQMA sites. Bromsgrove
still requires some further investigation in
partnership with Bromsgrove District
Council and the Highways Agency

APPENDIX TWO – SEA ENVIRONMENTAL
STATEMENT

Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 2
Environmental Statement
Prepared for Worcestershire County Council
March 2006
Introduction
This document has been prepared as an Environmental Statement as part of the
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Worcestershire Local Transport
Plan 2 (LTP2) 2006-2011. A full version of the Environmental Report and the LTP2
is available on the Worcestershire County Council (WCC) website:
http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/ltp.
Consultants Halcrow were appointed to undertake the SEA on behalf of Worcester
County Council.
Local Transport Plan 2
The purpose of a local transport plan is to provide local authorities with the
opportunity to produce comprehensive integrated transport strategies covering all
forms of surface transport. The Worcestershire LTP2 is intended to last for a period
of 5 years from 2006-2011.
The vision of the Worcestershire LTP2 is to support the diversity and character of the
County by delivering an efficient, safe and fair transport system that meets the needs
of all travellers and allows the easy movement of goods. This Environmental
Statement demonstrates how the assessment of environment effects has been
incorporated into the plan in consultation with the relevant bodies.
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Transport Plans are the subject of SEA according to the EU Directive (42/2001/EC)
on the assessment of effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment.
SEA is the process of protecting the environment and promoting sustainability. SEA
in the formal assessment of plans and programmes and covers a wide range of
sectors including transportation, land use development, energy, industry and
agriculture but to name a few. SEA is an overarching procedure which seeks to
integrate environment assessment at every stage of the decision making process.
The SEA process started in November 2004. To meet the requirements of the SEA
Directive the environmental assessment has been undertaken in parallel with the
transport plan preparation, with critical interfaces occurring at key stages. Table 1
shows the five stages of the SEA methodology used throughout this SEA.

Table 1: The five stages of SEA
A
B
C
D
E
SEA stages
Setting the context and objectives, establishing the
Baseline and deciding on the scope.
Developing and refining alternatives and assessing
effects.
Preparing the Environmental Report.
Consulting on the draft plan and the Environmental
Report.
Monitoring the significant effects of implementing the plan
on the environment.
The initial stage of the project was to gain an understanding of the existing
‘environmental baseline’ of the County and the existing programmes and plans which
are relevant to the LTP2. Using the baseline, and in consultation with the consultees,
16 SEA objectives were identified relating to the “likely significant effects on the
environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health,
fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage
including architectural and archaeological heritage, [and] landscape”, as required by
the SEA Directive.
All policies proposed in the Provisional LTP2 were assessed against the SEA
Objectives as well as the ‘business as usual’ alternative and their effects evaluated.
Proposed policies which had the potential to cause adverse impacts on the
environment were identified and subjected to a further, more detailed assessment of
potential impacts. This was carried out using a comprehensive assessment matrix.
The matrices assess the potential effects of these policies on the SEA objectives,
and focus on probability, duration, frequency, permanence, magnitude, geographic
extent and significance of effect. The Environmental Report also contains an
assessment of cumulative, secondary and synergistic effects.
The Environmental Report suggests possible mitigation measures and indicates how
the LTP2 could maximise positive impacts on the environment. Table 2 below shows
the recommended changes to the LTP2 as a result of the SEA findings, together with
WCC details of whether or not the LTP2 has been amended. If a recommendation
has not been incorporated, the reasoning behind the decision in given.
As required by DfT and ODPM SEA Guidance, consultation on the Environment
Report was undertaken alongside consultation on the provisional LTP2. As part of
the consultation process the Environmental Report was sent to the four statutory
consultees (English Nature, English Heritage, Countryside Agency and Environment
Agency) as well as to twelve relevant non-statutory consultees for comment. It was
also made available at Council offices within the County and on the WCC website.
Consultation responses and suggested WCC responses are summarised below.
The Environmental Report
The Environmental Report is a key output of SEA. It is a document required by the
SEA Directive as part of an environmental assessment, which identifies, describes
and evaluates the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the

plan. This Environmental Statement sets out how the findings and recommendations
in the Environmental Report have been included in and affected the LTP2.
The Environmental Statement
This Environmental Statement has been prepared in line with DfT (2004) and ODPM
guidelines (2005) and conforms to the SEA Directive (European Directive
2001/42/EC). The Directive says:
“…when a plan or programme is adopted, the [environmental] authorities… [and]
the public … are informed and the following items [shall be] made available to
those so informed: (a) the plan or programme as adopted, (b) a statement
summarising how environmental considerations have been integrated into the plan
or programme…. [including] the reasons for choosing the plan or programme as
adopted, in light of other reasonable alternatives dealt with, and (c) the measures
decided concerning monitoring” (Article 9(1)).
In response to the requirements of the Directive this Environmental Statement
includes:
• Changes to the plan in response to information in the Environmental Report;
• Ways in which responses to consultation have been taken into account;
• Reasons for choosing the preferred option, and why other reasonable
alternatives were rejected; and
• Suggested monitoring proposals.
Changes to the LTP2 in Response to the Environmental Report
The SEA process has influenced the LTP2 considerably and indeed a major objective
of the overall LTP2 strategy is to safeguard and improve Worcestershire’s
environment through a package of measures that seek to reduce the impact of
transportation upon the local and global environment. These include the
promotion of modal shift away from car dependency through measures such as
Travel Plans, improvement of passenger transport and better walking and cycle
networks. They also include better traffic management to reduce traffic
congestion, and accessibility planning to ensure that new developments are located
so as to minimise travel demand and car use. The Asset Management Plan will also
develop better maintenance techniques to minimise the use of natural resources
and promote recycling of materials where possible.
It is recognised that investment in improved transport facilities will inevitably
result in some schemes that will have some form of environmental impact. Where
this is the case, a full Environmental Impact Assessment will be required. Under
circumstances where a project falls outside of the EIA Regulations (SI 1999, No 293)
the design of new transport infrastructure will incorporate sustainable design
principles as a matter of course.
The following policies summarise how the County Council, through the LTP2
strategy, will seek to achieve the SEA objectives.

Policy SEA1: Where new transport infrastructure is required to implement the
LTP2 strategy, schemes will be designed using sustainable design and
construction principles, and an Environmental Impact Assessment
will be produced for larger schemes.
Policy SEA2: Where transport schemes are implemented, every effort will be
made to meet the following environmental objectives:
• Maintain and enhance Worcestershire’s biodiversity, flora and
fauna;
• Maintain and enhance landscape character;
• Protect and improve the water resource;
• Reduce flood risk;
• Maintain and improve air quality;
• Encourage energy efficiency and reduce contributions to
climate change;
• Conserve and enhance the historic and cultural environment;
• Support the sustainable extraction, re-use and re-cycling of
minerals and aggregates;
• Encourage the re-cycling of waste and use of renewable
resources;
• Minimise the impact of transport schemes upon the best and
most versatile agricultural land.
Policy SEA3: The Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) will set out how the
County Council will seek to meet the environmental objectives listed
in Policy SEA2 when delivering highways maintenance works across
the County. Consultation will be undertaken with relevant
organisations when developing the TAMP to ensure that these
objectives are met as closely as possible.
Consultation Responses
Sixteen consultation responses were received during the Environmental Report
consultation, which ran from the 24 th October to the 4 th December 2005. Comments
were received from:
• English Nature;
• English Heritage;
• Malvern Hills District Council;
• Redditch Borough Council;
• Worcestershire Wildlife Trust;
• Cotswolds AONB;
• Malvern Hills AONB;
• White Ladies Aston Parish Meeting;
• Private individual - John Devlin;
• Spetchley Parish;

• Cofton Hackett Parish Council;
• Dodford with Grafton Parish Council;
• Drakes Broughton and Wadborough with Pirton Parish Council;
• Chaddesley Corbett Parish Council;
• Norton-Juxta-Kempsey Parish Council; and
• Bretforton Parish Council.
All consultation comments received were carefully considered by Worcestershire
County Council and the Environmental consultants and the Environmental Report
was updated where appropriate.
Comments received were helpful and generally complimentary. The consultation
comments were varied but can be summarised into three main groups as follows:
• Comments, particularly those from the Statutory Consultees centred around
the baseline data with updated figures and more recent information sources.
• Many of the comments, particularly those from the Parish Councils
highlighted local environmental issues, concerns and desires, such as
concerns over congestion at the Pinvin cross-roads and the associated
environmental impacts of this.
• Other comments were based around more general environmental issues
suggesting best practice and mitigation measures, such as requesting that
the SEA recommend the use of low noise road surfaces.
The comments received and the WCC responses to them are detailed in the
Environmental Report. Comments referring to the LTP2 and not to the SEA but
received as part of the SEA Environmental Report consultation were passed on the
County Council for inclusion in the LTP2 consultation.
The updated version of the Environmental Report, incorporating consultation
comments where appropriate, has been republished alongside this Environmental
Statement, available to view on the WCC website.
Preferred Alternative Selection
The selection of the preferred alternatives was carried out during the Scoping stage
through the use of preliminary assessment matrices. These matrices provided a
broad understanding of the potential environmental impacts, both adverse and
beneficial, of the various options. Selection of preferred alternatives was then carried
out through a steering group meeting comprised of representatives of Worcestershire
County Council and the environmental consultants.
In order to fulfil the requirements of the SEA Directive and to ensure the LTP2
provided benefits to the environment, these options were then appraised against the
‘business as usual’ alternative, i.e. the continuation of the policies within the
preceding LTP. This process revealed which policies were likely to have an adverse
impact on the SEA objectives and required more detailed appraisal.
Fourteen out of the 101 LTP2 policies were assessed using detailed assessment
matrices which considered both the adverse and beneficial impacts on the SEA

objectives in terms of probability, duration, frequency, permanence, magnitude,
geographic extent and significance of effects. Suggested mitigation measures were
suggested for each policy assessed in this way in order to minimise the
environmental impact of the plan.
Suggested Monitoring Proposals
The monitoring requirements typically associated with the SEA process are
recognised as placing heavy demands on authorities with SEA responsibilities. For
this reason, the proposed monitoring framework should focus on those aspects of the
environment that are likely to be negatively impacted upon, or where the impact is
uncertain. Due to the theoretical nature of many of the LTP2 policies, however, this is
not always easily identifiable. Instead, the proposed monitoring programme aims to
give a flavour of progress against each objective. Nonetheless, it will be possible
(and may be necessary) to amend the proposed framework in accordance with, for
example, the information requirements of Environmental Impact Assessments related
to the LTP2 or unanticipated negative effects.
Table 3: Suggested monitoring framework
Objective / Effect
to be Monitored
Indicator /
information
Required
Data Source
Repetition
Trigger for
Remedial Action
Possible Action
1: Maintain and
enhance
Worcestershire’s
biodiversity, flora
and fauna
Condition of SSSIs English Nature Annual
Percentage of Sites
classified as
‘Unfavourable and
declining’ exceeds
10%
Review management,
seek funding for
improvement, ensure
nearby development is
appropriate.
2: Maintain and
enhance landscape
character
Land use in
Worcestershire
(from Character
maps)
State of
Environment
Report,
Worcestershire
Partnership
Annual
Urban land use
exceeds agreed
percentage
Review land use
policies, seek to
preserve / replace
certain character types
3: Protect and
improve the water
resource and reduce
flood risk
Biochemical
quality of water
bodies and
courses
Percentage of new
development in
flood plain
Environment
Agency
Environment
Agency
Annual
Annual
Misses regional
target
Misses regional
target
Tighten pollution
control, clamp down on
incidents, pursue
remediation measures
Review land use
policies, research
alternative siting for
new developments
Nitrogen dioxide
levels (micrograms
per cubic metre) at
AQMAs
WCC
Annual
Misses regional
targets
Promote cleaner fuels
and technologies,
imposes driving
restrictions and / or
congestion charging
4: Maintain and
improve air quality
Congestion –
journey times
(A4440 southern
link road,
Worcester,
Worcester city
centre,
Kidderminster,
Stourport, A38
Bromsgrove,
Evesham)
WCC
Annual
Congestion and
journey times
increasing.
Consider traffic
management options to
relieve congestion.

5: Encourage
energy efficiency
and reduce
contributions to
climate change
CO 2 emissions NAEI, Defra Annual
Mode share of
journeys to school
(car share, public
transport, walking
and cycling)
WCC
Annual
Misses regional
targets
Mode share does
not increase
Expand renewable
energy production, see
point 4 above
Increase promotion of
mode share of journeys
to school
6: Conserve and,
where appropriate,
enhance the historic
and cultural
environment
Percentage of
conservation
areas lost or
damaged
WCC
Annual
Exceeds 2% per
annum
Taking preventative
measures
7: Reduce crime and
promote community
safety
Percentage of
residents who feel
safe
ONS / census /
British Crime
Survey
Bi-annual
Falls below agreed
level
Address crime, fear of
crime, street lighting,
etc
8: Reduce poverty
and social exclusion,
promote a strong
community and
encourage
accessibility to
services
Access to bus
services
Proportion of bus
fleet that are low
floor
WCC
Annual
Exceeds agreed
levels
WCC Annual Proportion falls
Improve accessibility
(more services, better
links)
Increase procurement
of low floor buses
9: Encourage
buoyant and
sustainable tourism
industry, including
access to
countryside
Footway condition WCC Annual
Ease of use of
rights of way
WCC
Annual
Footway condition
is deemed to be
deteriorating
Footway condition
is deemed to be
deteriorating
Improve existing
network
Improve existing
network
10: Promote,
support and sustain
healthy people, their
lifestyles and
communities they
live in
Percentage of
people who travel
to work by foot or
cycle
Total killed or
seriously injured
casualties
WCC / ONS
WCC
Bi-annual
Annual
Falls below agreed
level
Increasing
incidence of fatal or
seriously injured
casulties
Increase restrictions on
car use, facilitate
healthier, more
sustainable forms of
transport, discourage
decentralisation and
suburbanisation
Consider traffic
management options in
‘accident blackspots’
11: Encourage
economic growth
that does not
compromise future
generations, and
improve access to
employment
Number of
employers that
have adopted a
travel plan
Proportion of the
workforce that
works in
organisations that
have adopted a
travel plan
WCC
WCC
Annual
Annual
Falls below agreed
level
Falls below agreed
level
Improve accessibility to
educational
establishments
Increased promotion of
employer travel plans
12: Ensure the
appropriate use of
previously
developed land and
buildings
Percentage of new
development on
previously
developed land
WCC
Annual
Falls below agreed
level
Favour brownfield sites
when planning new
transport infrastructure

13: Support the
sustainable
extraction, re-use
and recycling of
minerals and
aggregates
Percentage of
transport
infrastructure
materials coming
from recycled
sources
HA / WCC
Annual
Falls below agreed
level
Impose restrictions on
developers
14: Manage waste
according to waste
hierarchy,
encourage recycling
and use of
renewable
resources
Means of waste
transportation
WCC
Annual
Road transportation
exceeds agreed
level
Encourage use of canal
network, expand
regional processing
capacity
15: Promote
sustainable design
and construction
Percentage of new
transport facilities
built to BREEAM
or other
sustainable
standards
WCC
Bi-Annual
Falls below agreed
level
Impose restrictions on
developers, renovate
existing facilities to
better standards
16: Maintain the
best and most
versatile agricultural
land
Percentage loss of
land classified
Grade 1 to 3a
WCC / Defra
Annual
Exceeds agreed
level
Seek to minimise new
transport developments
that destroy high grade
land

APPENDIX THREE – LTP2 IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN

LTP
Strategy
ACC1
ACC2
ACC3
ACC4
ACC5
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Accessibility Strategy
Establish a Worcestershire Accessibility
April 2006 – WCC; DC; WCC – Revenue LTP1
Partnership to oversee the ongoing development March 2009 NHS; WP; AWM – Rural Access to
and implementation of the Accessibility Strategy.
AWM
Services programme
The Strategy will be reviewed on an annual basis.
(£935K – capital and
revenue)
Other WAP partners as
Use accessibility mapping to identify transport
problems experienced by specific sectors of the
population, and work with relevant agencies
through the Worcestershire Accessibility
Partnership to address those problems.
Use accessibility mapping as a key element of
future land use planning when assessing
transportation needs of future development plans
and of major development proposals.
All transport schemes funded through LTP2 will be
designed to ensure compliance with construction
standards to promote accessibility for all sectors of
the community.
All passenger transport vehicles purchased using
County Council funding will need to comply with
the current standards in relation to accessibility.
2006-11 WCC; WAP;
NHS; DC
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Developers
appropriate
WCC – Revenue
AWM – Rural Access to
Services programme
(£935K – capital and
revenue)
Other WAP partners as
appropriate
WCC – Revenue;
DC – Revenue (Local
Development
Framework preparation)
Developer (S106)
LTP1
LTP1
Headline Risks
Partnership focuses on some
accessibility issues to the
detriment of others.
AWM funding only guaranteed
for three years.
Accessibility mapping software
does not operate satisfactorily
Funding not sufficient to
implement solutions to
identified problems
Local Planning Authority does
not take account of
accessibility mapping when
reaching final planning
decision
2006-11 WCC WCC – LTP2 None Limited resources mean that
design audits not rigorous,
resulting in infrastructure being
built that is not accessible
2006-11 WCC WCC – LTP2 / Revenue None Breach of DDA through
purchase of inaccessible
vehicles
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; DC = District Councils; NHS = National Health Service partners; WAP = Worcestershire Accessibility Partnership;
AWM = Advantage West Midlands; WP = Worcestershire Partnership

LTP
Strategy
IPT1
IPT2
IPT3
IPT4
IPT5
IPT6
IPT7
IPT8
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
Review the Bus and Information Strategy and 2006-07 WCC; IPTF; Bus WCC – Revenue; BVPI102
replace it with an Integrated Passenger Transport
operators; BQP; LTP; DC; Bus
Strategy, which will then be implemented across
CT; NHS; WAP Operators
the County in partnership with the Integrated
Passenger Transport Joint Members Forum.
Work with partners on the Worcestershire
Accessibility Partnership to identify opportunities
for the improvement of bus facilities and services.
Ensure a consistent approach to bus stop
provision, management, maintenance and
information provision is achieved across the
County.
Identify key corridors and locations for bus
priority, focusing on areas of greatest congestion
and benefit for bus services, and to design and
implement appropriate bus priority schemes.
Promote the improvement of existing bus stations
and the provision of better interchange facilities
with rail services.
Provide better information on bus journeys to the
public, including introduction of Real Time
Passenger Information on key routes, at main
locations such as bus stations, and through
technology such as mobile phones.
Work with operators to improve marketing of
services, and develop joint initiatives with key
destinations such as shopping centres and tourist
attractions.
Work with other partners on the Worcestershire
Accessibility Partnership to ensure that
community transport and voluntary transport
schemes are co-ordinated with wider public
transport provision.
2006-11 WCC;IPTF; Bus
operators; NHS;
BQP
2006-11 WCC; IPTF;
CALC; Bus
operators
2006-11 WCC; IPTF; Bus
operators; WMC
2006-11 WCC; IPTF; Bus
& Rail operators;
NR
2006-11 WCC; IPTF; Bus
operators
2006-11 WCC; IPTF; Bus
operators; Other
relevant bodies
2006-11 WCC; IPTF; CT;
NHS
WCC – Revenue;
LTP; DC; NHS; Bus
operators
WCC – Revenue &
LTP; DC; CALC;
Bus operators
LTP; Developer
(S106);
LTP; Developer;
NR; Bus operators
WCC; LTP; DC;
Bus operators;
Developer (S106)
WCC (Revenue);
DC; Bus operators;
Visitor destinations
WCC (Revenue);
DC; NHS;
BVPI102
BVPI103
BVPI102
BVPI102
BVPI103
BVPI102
BVPI102
Headline Risks
Failure to secure agreement on
the strategy amongst all partners
Commercial bus services
withdrawals threaten the
establishment of a viable network
Failure to secure agreement of all
partners on the development of
common management approach
Failure to secure relevant Traffic
Regulation Orders to permit bus
lanes to be introduced
High rental charges deter bus
operators from using bus stations,
thereby reducing the potential for
interchange
Limited funding restricts extent to
which Real Time Information can
be rolled out across
Worcestershire
Failure to agree common
approach to provision of
information and marketing of
services results in continuation of
fragmented approach
Failure to agree integrated
working with individual Community
Transport providers results in lack
of coordination

LTP
Strategy
IPT9
IPT10
IPT11
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
Work with District Councils through the Joint Members 2006-09 DC; WCC; DC; WCC
Integrated Passenger Transport Forum to establish and
(£500k p.a.
maintain a Countywide concessionary travel scheme that
until 2008/09)
gives equal journey opportunities to all eligible residents
irrespective of their geographic location within
Worcestershire.
Work with other partners and taxi operators to ensure that
taxis play a full role in the delivery of the Integrated
Passenger Transport Strategy.
Work with operators to improve the interchange between
express coach and local bus services within the County,
especially in Worcester where demand for coach travel can
be expected to increase over the LTP2 period, and to
improve the range of express coach services serving
Worcester.
2006-11 WCC; IPTF;
DC; Taxi
operators
2006-11 WCC; IPTF;
Coach & Bus
operators
WCC
(Revenue);
DC; Taxi
operators
WCC (LTP);
Coach & Bus
Operators
LTP
Indicator
BVPI102
BVPI102
BVPI102
Headline Risks
Large deficit results from higher
than anticipated ridership levels.
Failure to agree continuation of
scheme beyond 2008/09
Failure to secure common
approach to taxi licensing across
the District Councils threatens use
of taxi-bus approach to local
passenger transport provision
Congested networks deters coach
operators from using interchange
points
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; IPTF = Joint Members Integrated Passenger Transport Forum; DC = District Councils; NHS = National Health Service
partners; BQP = Bus Quality Partnership; CT = Community Transport providers; CALC = Town / Parish Councils;

LTP
Strategy
RAIL1
RAIL2
RAIL3
RAIL4
RAIL5
RAIL6
RAIL7
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Rail Strategy
To ensure that the rail network is in a fit state to play a 2006-11 DfT; NR; TOC;
full role in the implementation of a sustainable transport
WCC; RPC
strategy for Worcestershire.
Ensure that train operating companies meet the needs
of Worcestershire travellers when planning and
delivering rail services, and seek to influence the new
West Midlands and Cross Country franchises to provide
better rail services within Worcestershire.
To attain direct access to national rail services through
the construction of a Parkway station at the intersection
of the Worcester – London and Birmingham – Bristol
railway lines.
To work with the rail industry to upgrade all stations to
make them easier, safer and more attractive for people
to use by implementing a package of measures
including additional car parking, platform lengthening,
passenger facilities such as waiting room/booking office
and disabled access.
To improve general accessibility to all stations within
the County and work towards achieving full compliance
with the DDA at all facilities.
Work with rail industry partners to identify and
implement infrastructure improvements to increase the
capacity of the rail network and reliability of services.
To recognise our regional role by providing support to
neighbouring authorities in their development of rail
schemes where these will clearly have benefits for
Worcestershire.
2006-11 DfT; TOC; NR;
WCC; RPC
2010/11 DfT; NR; Laing
Rail; WCC;
TOC; WDC
2006-11 DfT; NR; TOC;
WCC; DC;
RPC
2006 –11 DfT; NR; TOC;
WCC; DC;
RPC; Disability
groups
2006-11 DfT; NR; TOC;
RPC; WCC
LTP2
Indicator
Headline Risks
DfT; NR; TOC WCC4 Capacity limitations on
Worcestershire rail network
constrains role that rail can play in
LTP2 strategy
DfT; TOC; NR WCC4 Capacity limitations restrict the
extent to which Train Operating
Companies can deliver service
improvements through the new
franchises
LTP; NR; TOC;
Laing Rail;
Developer
(S106)
LTP; NR; TOC;
Developer
(S106)
LTP; NR; TOC;
Developer
(S106)
2006-11 WCC WCC
(Revenue)
WCC4
WCC4
WCC4
Failure to secure approval from DfT
for business case for the new
Station. Omission of station from
rail industry forward plans and
franchise specification.
Failure to secure funding package
Failure to secure approval from DfT
/ NR for station enhancements.
Failure to put funding package
together to deliver improvements.
Failure to put funding package
together to deliver improvements
NR; TOC WCC4 Insufficient funding within rail
industry to permit improvements to
go ahead
N/A
Support for schemes detracts from
case for Worcestershire schemes.
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; DfT = Department for Transport (Rail Division); NR = Network Rail; TOC = Train Operating Companies; RPC = Rail
Passengers Council; WDC = Wychavon District Council; DC = District Councils

LTP
Strategy
ECON1
ECON2
ECON3
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicators
Economic Strategy Support
Support the implementation of transport 2006-11 WCC; DC; WCC (revenue); DC; LTP1;
strategies that will assist the sustainable
Developers; Developers; AWM LTP2;
development of key economic development
AWM
WCC2
sites identified within the Worcestershire
Economic Strategy.
To support the vitality of market towns within
Worcestershire through the implementation of
transport measures to provide a safer and
pleasanter town centre environment.
To support the promotion of Worcestershire as
a tourism destination through relevant
investment in transport measures to improve
accessibility to key visitor destinations.
2006-11 WCC; DC; Town
Councils; AWM
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Visitor attraction
operators
LTP; DC; AWM;
LAA (pumppriming);
Developer
(S106)
WCC (Revenue);
DC; Attractions;
AWM
LTP1
N/a
Headline Risks
New sites gain approval that
cannot be accessed sustainably
Limited funding means that all
market town schemes cannot be
brought forward
Failure to deliver infrastructure and
services to support visitor
attractions results in fewer visitors
coming to Worcestershire
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; DC = District Councils; AWM = Advantage West Midlands; LAA = Local Area Agreement

LTP
Strategy
WALK1
WALK2
WALK3
CYC1
CYC2
CYC3
CYC4
QL1
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Sustainable Travel: Walk / Cycle / Quiet Lanes /
Motorcycling
Implement a Countywide programme of
2006-11 WCC; DC; CALC LTP; Developer LTP1;
improvements to the pedestrian network.
(S106)
LTP4
Encourage people to make local journeys on foot
by providing good quality information on walking
routes through the publication of walk / cycle /
public transport maps for all areas of the County.
Improve pedestrian facilities to enable isolated
and/or more vulnerable people safe and convenient
access to essential services.
Implement a countywide programme of
improvements to the cycle network.
Work with SUSTRANS to further develop an interurban
network of cycle routes providing strategic
links across the County including the National
Cycle Network.
Provide secure cycle parking facilities at key
destinations such as town centres and retail parks,
transport interchanges, and workplaces / schools.
Encourage people to make local journeys by bike
by providing good quality information on cycling
routes through the publication of walk / cycle /
public transport maps for all areas of the County.
Quiet Lane schemes will only be considered where
they have firm community support and where they
will add value to other strategy areas within LTP2
2006-11 WCC; DC; CALC LTP; LTP1;
LTP4
2006-11 WCC; DC; CALC LTP; Developer
(S106)
2006-11 WCC; DC;
SUSTRANS; Cycle
Forum
2006-11 WCC; DC;
SUSTRANS; Cycle
Forum
2006-11 WCC; DC; Cycle
Forum; NR; TOC;
Developers
2006-11 WCC; DC; Cycle
Forum;
SUSTRANS
LTP; Developer
(S106); DC; DfT;
SUSTRANS
LTP; Developer
(S106); DC; DfT;
SUSTRANS
LTP; Developer
(S106); DC; DfT;
SUSTRANS; NR;
TOC
LTP; DC;
SUSTRANS
LTP1;
LTP4
LTP3
LTP3
LTP3
LTP3
2006-11 WCC; DC; CALC LTP; DC; CALC LTP1;
LTP3;
LTP4
Headline Risks
Limited funding restricts
ability to deliver significant
programme of walking
schemes
Limited funding restricts
ability to publish and update
maps
Limited funding restricts
ability to improve
accessibility of the walking
network
Limited funding restricts
ability to deliver a
comprehensive cycling
network
Limited funding restricts
ability to deliver a
comprehensive cycling
network
Limited funding restricts the
opportunity to install
sufficient parking facilities
Limited funding restricts
ability to publish and update
maps
Failure to identify suitable
opportunities for Quiet Lanes
Failure to secure approval of
local community

LTP
Strategy
MC1
MC2
MC3
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP Indicator Headline Risks
Sustainable Travel: Walk / Cycle / Quiet Lanes /
Motorcycling
To support motorcycling through the provision of
secure motorcycle parking at key locations and
through appropriate traffic management measures
To work with partners to develop the Motorcycle
Forum and through the Forum identify and
implement measures that will improve safety and
convenience of motorcycling
To encourage the take up of motorcycling through
the Motorcycle Forum as a real alternative mode of
transport with positive promotion and education of
its benefits
2006-11 WCC; DC;
MCF
2006-11 WCC;
MCF
2006-11 WCC;
MCF
LTP;
Developer
(S106)
LTP;
Developer
(S106)
WCC
(Revenue)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Limited funding restricts the opportunity to
install sufficient parking facilities and traffic
management measures
Limited funding restricts the opportunity to
deliver identified improvements
Limited funding restricts the ability to
produce and update publicity material
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; DC = District Councils; CALC = Town / Parish Councils; NR = Network Rail; MCF = Motorcycle Forum;

LTP
Strategy
ROW1
ROW2
ROW3
ROW4
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Rights of Way Improvement Plan
Support the development and implementation of the Rights of Way 2006-11 WCC; DC; WCC; LTP;
Improvement Plan, providing an integrated network of utility and
LAF DC;
leisure routes for pedestrians, cyclists and horseriders.
Manage and promote the development of footpaths, bridleways and
byways for people to walk, cycle and ride on the network.
Assess the extent to which local rights of way meet present and
future needs, the opportunities for exercise and recreation as well
as utility journeys, and the accessibility to rights of way for all
members of the community, including those with visibility or
mobility problems.
Provide the County Council with the information necessary to plan
how the network should be improved in terms of physical
improvements and the provision of better information.
2006-11 WCC; DC;
LAF;
2006-11 WCC; DC;
LAF
2006-11 WCC;
LAF
WCC; LTP;
DC; Developer
(S106)
WCC
(Revenue)
WCC
(Revenue)
LTP
Indicator
BVPI183
BVPI183
BVPI183
BVPI183
Headline Risks
Failure to publish the
ROWIP by the end of 2007.
Limited funding for the
implementation of the
ROWIP
Limited funding for the
proper management of the
ROW network
Failure to reach agreement
on the priorities for action
within Worcestershire
Limited resources restrict
the ability to undertake full
assessments
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; DC = District Councils; LAF = Local Access Forum;

LTP
Strategy
STP1
STP2
STP3
STP4
ETP1
ETP2
ETP3
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Travel Plans
Development of School Travel Plans for all County 2006-11 WCC LTP; DfES grant; LTP4;
schools and the implementation of infrastructure
WCC (Revenue) WCC1
improvements where appropriate to support these plans
Review the provision of school transport across the
County, and consider the introduction of “Yellow”
buses on a pilot basis to assess their potential role in
reducing car use for school travel
Identify opportunities to re-organise public transport
services to offer travel to students who don’t currently
qualify for specific school transport provision
Develop a greater cohesion between school travel plan
development and other initiatives, such as healthy
schools and eco-schools, including a wider involvement
with curriculum-based activities
Support for Employer Travel Plans, including grant
support to assist employers in delivering local travel
planning initiatives
Work with District Councils to ensure that all new
developments exceeding certain thresholds will be
required to prepare and implement Travel Plans
The County Council will continue to lead by example by
further development and implementation of a Travel
Plan covering all Council employees and buildings
2006/07 WCC; Bus
operators
2006-11 WCC; Bus
operators
WCC (Revenue);
LTP; Bus
operators
LTP4;
Headline Risks
Limited funding constrains the
ability to construct supporting
measures for the Travel Plan.
Schools unwilling to participate in
the programme.
Failure to secure agreement on
pilot project following school
transport review.
Limited funding to meet
requirements.
WCC (Revenue) LTP4 Failure to secure agreement on
appropriate way forward on
school transport provision.
Limited funding to implement the
outcome of the review
2006-11 WCC; NHS WCC (Revenue) LTP4 Pressure on the school curriculum
means that links cannot be
properly made
2006-11 Employers;
WCC; DC
2006-11 DC; WCC;
Developers
WCC (Revenue);
LTP; Developer
(S106)
2006-11 WCC WCC (Revenue);
LTP
WCC2
Failure to secure co-operation of
employers in the Travel Plan
process
Developer (S106) WCC2 Failure of Local Planning
Authority to enforce planning
conditions requiring Travel Plans
Failure to ensure that suitable
incentives are in place to
encourage implementation of
Travel Plans
WCC2
Limited funding available for
implementation of County Council
Travel Plan
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; NHS = National Health Service; DC = District Councils; DfES = Department for Education and Skills

LTP
Strategy
FQP1
FQP2
FQP3
FQP4
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Freight Strategy
Support to the Freight Quality Partnership in identifying 2006-11 WCC; FQP WCC (Revenue); N/A
solutions to local issues relevant to the improved
LTP; FQP;
movement of freight in a sustainable way
Developer (S106)
Working through the FQP, identify suitable locations for
new lorry parking facilities across the County to meet the
needs identified above, using LTP funding to support
delivery of these facilities
To explore the greater use of rail and inland waterways
for the carriage of freight within the County
Work with District Councils to identify opportunities for
the re-location of freight generators from environmentally
sensitive locations to sites with direct access to strategic
road or rail networks
2006-11 WCC; FQP;
DC;
Developers
2006-11 WCC; FQP;
BW; NR
2006-11 WCC; DC;
FQP; NR
LTP; FQP;
Developer (S106)
N/A
Headline Risks
Failure to identify suitable
solutions to local issues
through partnership
approach
Failure to secure relevant
planning approvals for
identified sites.
Limited funding constrains
ability to deliver identified
sites.
LTP; FQP; NR; BW N/A Failure to identify suitable
sites for facilities.
Failure to secure market for
movement of goods by rail
or water.
LTP; FQP; NR;
Developer (S106)
N/A
Limited funding constrains
ability to assist with relocation.
Failure to secure planning
approval for new site limits
opportunities for re-location
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; FQP = Freight Quality Partnership; DC = District Councils; BW = British Waterways; NR = Network Rail

LTP
Strategy
AQ1
AQ2
AQ3
FP1
FP2
FP3
FP4
FP5
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Air Quality and Environment
Implement the measures outlined in Policies BROM3, 2006-11 WCC; WFDC; LTP; HA;
WF1 and WF4 to achieve the removal of Air Quality
BDC; HA Developer
Management Area (AQMA) designation from the three
(S106)
existing sites identified
Work with District Councils and other partners to
ensure that no new AQMA’s are declared during the
LTP2 period as a result of increasing traffic levels
Contribute towards the general improvement in air
quality, and towards meeting the targets set in the
County’s Climate Change Strategy, through the
implementation of the LTP2 strategy
Worcestershire County Council will use Priority Fuels
in its vehicle fleet, which are chosen according to
environmental performance, their fitness-for-purpose,
and cost
Worcestershire County Council will procure vehicles
for its vehicle fleet according to which manufacturers
and models best fit the fuel priorities and fitness-forpurpose
within each vehicle category
To complement the environmental performance of its
fuel priorities, Worcestershire County Council will fit
those emission control technologies, which offer
significant environmental benefits at a reasonable cost
Worcestershire County Council will continue to
encourage the uptake of the cleanest cars for its
employees through its Company Car Policy
Worcestershire County Council will endeavour to stay
up to speed with vehicle/fuel developments in
technologies, costs and availability. This will direct
future actions and the policy will therefore be reviewed
every 4-5 years
2006-11 WCC; DC; HA; LTP; HA;
Developer
(S106)
2006-11 WCC; DC; All
other delivery
partners for LTP
strategy
LTP
Indicator
LTP8
LTP8
Headline Risks
Failure to secure agreement on
appropriate measures to tackle air
quality problems.
External factors influence traffic
flows resulting in worsening air
quality at sensitive locations.
LTP LTP8 External factors influence traffic
flows resulting in worsening air
quality at sensitive locations and in
greater greenhouse gas emissions.
2006-11 WCC WCC N/A Limited availability of priority fuels
restricts ability for their use within
the fleet
2006-11 WCC WCC; LTP N/A Limited availability of vehicles
capable of using priority fuels
constrains purchasing strategy
2006-11 WCC WCC N/A Limited resources available for the
use of emission control technologies
2006-11 WCC WCC N/A Limited resources available to rollout
policy to all employees
2006-11 WCC WCC N/A Limited resources to keep abreast of
new developments

LTP
Strategy
FP6
SEA1
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Air Quality and Environment
Worcestershire County Council will encourage partner
2006-11 WCC; DC; WCC; DC;
organisations, including its contractors, and individuals to adopt the
Bus Bus
aims and objectives of this policy on renewable fuel whenever
operators; operators;
possible and practical
TMC; TMC
Where new transport infrastructure is required to implement the
LTP2 strategy, schemes will be designed using sustainable design
and construction principles, and an Environmental Impact
Assessment will be produced for larger schemes
SEA2 Policy SEA2: Where transport schemes are implemented, every
effort will be made to meet the following
environmental objectives:
• Maintain and enhance Worcestershire’s
biodiversity, flora and fauna;
• Maintain and enhance landscape character;
• Protect and improve the water resource;
• Reduce flood risk;
• Maintain and improve air quality;
• Encourage energy efficiency and reduce
contributions to climate change;
• Conserve and enhance the historic and
cultural environment;
• Support the sustainable extraction, re-use
and re-cycling of minerals and aggregates;
• Encourage the re-cycling of waste and use
of renewable resources;
• Minimise the impact of transport schemes
upon the best and most versatile
agricultural land.
2006-11 WCC;
Halcrow
2006-11 WCC;
Halcrow
LTP
Indicator
N/A
Headline Risks
Resource implications mean
that partners are unable to
participate in programmes
LTP N/A Failure to ensure that design
teams are fully up to date
with best practice in
sustainable design
LTP N/A Failure to complete best
practice environmental
procedures during scheme
design process results in
environmental impact of
scheme being greater than it
should be.
SEA3
The Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) will set out how the
County Council will seek to meet the environmental objectives listed
in Policy SEA2 when delivering highways maintenance works across
the County. Consultation will be undertaken with relevant
organisations when developing the TAMP to ensure that these
objectives are met as closely as possible
2006-07 WCC WCC N/A Failure to include best
environmental practice
within TAMP means that
opportunities to spread such
best practice is missed.

LTP
Strategy
Air Quality and Environment
NOI1 Policy NOI1: The County Council will seek to ensure that the
impact of transport-related noise on local
communities is minimised by:
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
• Ensuring that new transport infrastructure is
designed to minimise the impact of transportrelated
noise, and where possible reduces such
impact on local communities;
• Working with partners on relevant Fora, such as
the Freight Quality Partnership, to reduce the
impact of noise from various areas of transport
activity.
• Introducing road surfaces that reduce traffic
noise where appropriate through the Transport
Asset Management Plan;
2006-11 WCC; DC;
FQP;
Halcrow; TMC
LTP
Indicator
Headline Risks
WCC; LTP N/A Limited resources mean that
best practice techniques for
noise reduction are not
properly identified
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; HA = Highways Agency; DC = District Councils; WFDC = Wyre Forest District Council; BDC = Bromsgrove District Council;
TMC = Term Maintenance Contractor; FQP = Freight Quality Partnership

LTP
Strategy
PARK1
PARK2
ITS1
ITS2
ITS3
ITS4
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Tackling Congestion
Work with District Councils to ensure that Decriminalised
Parking Enforcement is rolled out across the County by
2011.
Work with District Councils and private car park
operators to ensure that car parking management is coordinated
with other transportation policy, parking
charges are co-ordinated to achieve the objectives of the
LTP strategy, and that information on car park occupancy
is shared and disseminated to the public
To develop systems using technology to allow proactive
management of traffic within town centres, including the
ability to respond rapidly to incidents on the highway
network, and to provide accurate up-to-date information
to the travelling public on travel conditions
To ensure that systems are compatible with other
databases to allow rapid exchange of information to
assist with traffic management
To develop with partners systems which permit proper
integration of public transport services and the collation
and dissemination of real time information on public
transport services to the travelling public
To develop integrated ticketing and booking systems to
give passengers a seamless journey
LTP
Indicator
Headline Risks
2006-11 WCC; DC WCC; LTP; DC WCC3 Failure to establish a business
case for DPE results in only
partial rollout across
Worcestershire being achieved
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Private car park
operators
2006-11 WCC; HA; DC;
Passenger
transport
operators
LTP; WCC; Car
Park operators;
Developer
(S106)
LTP; HA; DC;
Developer
(S106); Bus and
Rail operators
2006-11 WCC; DC; HA LTP; HA; DC;
Developer
(S106);
2006-11 WCC; IPTF;
Passenger
transport
operators
2006-11 WCC; IPTF;
Passenger
transport
operators
LTP; DC;
Developer
(S106); Bus and
Rail operators
WCC; LTP; DC;
Bus and Rail
Operators
WCC3
N/A
N/A
BVPI103
BVPI103
Failure to achieve a consensus
between public and private
sector operators threatens
ability to achieve a co-ordinated
parking policy
Failure to ensure compatibility
between different operating
systems means that full
benefits of information
exchange not achieved.
Limited funding means that full
ITS systems cannot be
procured
Limited funding means that full
county-wide system cannot be
introduced
Limited funding means that full
county-wide system cannot be
introduced.
Failure to agree on a common
system restricts ability to
introduce county-wide scheme

LTP
Strategy
TM1
TM2
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Tackling Congestion
To ensure that systems are in place to allow proper 2006-11 WCC; HA; Utility
programming of highway works and management of
companies
planned and unplanned works / incidents to ensure that
congestion is minimised
To maintain close liaison with the Highways Agency,
West Mercia Constabulary and other interested
organisations to ensure a continual flow of up to date
and accurate information on traffic and travel conditions,
including planned works and unplanned incidents
2006-11 WCC; HA; WMC;
Passenger
Transport
operators
WCC; Utility
Companies
WCC; HA;
WMC
LTP
Indicator
BVPI100
BVPI100
Headline Risks
Failure to integrate works
between different organisations
results in additional disruption on
the highway network
Failure to respond adequately to
planned and unplanned incidents
results in greater traffic
congestion that could have been
prevented.
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; HA = Highways Agency; DC = District Councils; IPTF = Joint Members Integrated Passenger Transport
Forum; WMC = West Mercia Constabulary

LTP
Strategy
RS1
RS2
RS3
RS4
RS5
RS6
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP Headline Risks
Indicator
Road Safety
To ensure that any activity on the transport 2006-11 WCC WCC BVPI99 Limited resources mean that system of
network will improve the safety of all users,
safety audits fails to monitor all
irrespective of the prime objective of that
activities on the highway network,
activity
resulting in schemes going ahead that
do not contribute to improved safety
To further reduce casualties through the
implementation of casualty reduction
schemes at identified cluster sites, and
through the implementation of Route Action
Plans and Area Action Plans to tackle groups
of cluster sites
Where an identified cluster site will be
affected by traffic or other travel demand
generated by a new development, the
developer will be expected to provide
funding to implement schemes to tackle the
specific casualty problem
To provide road safety education and
training at all schools and colleges within
Worcestershire, and to work with other
public and private sector organisations to
promote road safety
To provide driver training and assessment
schemes for County Council staff and for
external organisations, including taxi drivers.
To undertake a review of all speed limits
within the County to ensure that a consistent
approach is taken to the setting of limits, and
that driver’s are educated into driving at the
appropriate speed for each limit
for all road users
2006-11 WCC; WMC LTP BVPI99 Limited funding means that not all
priority sites, routes or areas can be
fully treated
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Developer
2006-11 WCC; WMC;
FRS; NHS
Developer (S106) BVPI99 Limited resources mean that not all
developments are scrutinised resulting
in development going ahead that will
impact on cluster site without specific
improvements being identified.
Local Planning Authority fails to act
upon advice from WCC on a safety
issue, meaning that suitable treatment
for a cluster site is not funded
WCC; WMC; FRS BVPI99 Failure to co-ordinate activities
between partners results in duplication
of message
2006-11 WCC; WMC; DC WCC; DC BVPI99 Failure to provide co-ordinated driver
training results in a mixed message
being sent out to the public.
2006-11 WCC; WMC LTP BVPI99 Failure to secure Traffic Regulation
Orders for new or revised speed limits
means that an inconsistent message
remains for the motorist.
Failure to secure agreement of police
to enforce speed limits.

LTP
Strategy
RS7
RS8
RS9
RS10
RS11
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Road Safety
Introduce 20 m.p.h. speed limits outside
schools across the County where such a
limit can be introduced without
compromising overall road safety for all road
users
Introduce 20 m.p.h. speed limits at other
locations across the County where
pedestrian safety is a priority, such as High
Streets in town centres, where such a limit
can be introduced without compromising
overall road safety
Work with partners on the West Mercia
Safety Camera Partnership (and/or a
successor Road Safety Partnership) to
ensure that speed enforcement activity is
maintained across the County
Work with partners on the Safety Camera
Partnership (and/or a successor Road Safety
Partnership) towards the development and
implementation of a Speed Awareness
Course as part of the Partnership’s activity
Implement a programme of minor schemes
that will tackle local problems relating to
congestion, safety, accessibility or air quality
identified by the local community but which
are not a priority under these individual
strategy headings
Headline Risks
2006-11 WCC; WMC LTP BVPI99 Failure to secure Traffic Regulation
Orders for speed limits mean that
limits cannot be enforced
2006-11 WCC; DC; Town
Councils; WMC
2006-11 WCC; WMC; HA;
NHS; Partner
LA’S; Magistrates
Service
2007/08 WCC; WMC;
NHS; Partner
LA’s; Magistrates
Service
LTP BVPI99 Failure to secure Traffic Regulation
Orders for speed limits mean that
limits cannot be enforced
WCC; WMC;
Herefordshire;
Shropshire; Telford
& Wrekin; HA
WCC; WMC;
Herefordshire;
Shropshire; Telford
& Wrekin; HA
2006-11 WCC; DC; CALC LTP; DC; CALC;
Developer (S106)
BVPI99
BVPI99
N/A
Failure to reach agreement on shape
of Partnership beyond 2007/08 means
that Partnership collapses, threatening
the level of speed enforcement activity.
Police re-organisation changes shape
of Partnership and ground rules for
speed enforcement.
Failure to reach agreement on the
framework of a common scheme
across the West Mercia area
Limited funding restricts the number of
schemes that can come forward
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; WMC = West Mercia Constabulary; DC = District Councils; NHS = National Health Service;
CALC = Town / Parish Councils; HA = Highways Agency

LTP
Strategy
BROM1
BROM2
BROM3
BROM4
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Bromsgrove
Work with partners to identify and implement improvements to 2006-11 WCC; BDC;
Bromsgrove Bus Station as part of an overall town centre
Bus
enhancement project
operators
Work with rail industry partners to secure a package of
improvements at Bromsgrove Railway Station
The County Council will work with the Highways Agency and
Bromsgrove District Council to identify the most appropriate
strategy to allow removal of the AQMA designation at M42
Junction 1
Work with partners including Birmingham City Council and
Bromsgrove District Council to identify the appropriate
transport strategy to improve strategic accessibility to the
Longbridge area without having a significant environmental
impact upon North Worcestershire
2006-09 WCC; DfT;
NR; TOC
2009-11 WCC; BDC;
HA
2006-11 WCC; BCC;
BDC; HA;
AWM;
LTP
Indicator
Headline Risks
LTP BVPI102 Bus service review of
Bromsgrove area identifies
less need for a central bus
station
LTP; NR; TOC;
Developer
(S106)
WCC3
Failure to secure a funding
package threatens delivery of
wider improvement
Development on adjacent site
threatens ability to deliver car
park improvements
LTP; HA; LTP8 Failure to reach agreement
on appropriate package of
measures to tackle the air
quality problems
Developer
(S106); BCC
(LTP); AWM
LTP1
Failure to reach agreement
amongst all parties on
appropriate solution to access
issues.
Failure to attract new
development to Longbridge
site
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; BDC = Bromsgrove District Council; DfT = Department for Transport (Rail Division); NR = Network Rail;
TOC = Train Operating Company; HA = Highways Agency; BCC = Birmingham City Council; AWM = Advantage West Midlands

LTP
Strategy
MH1
MH2
MH3
MH4
MH5
MH6
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Measure Risk
Malvern Hills
To support the improvement of access to the
major development sites within Malvern to allow it
to fulfil its role as a key node on the Central
Technology Belt
To support the enhancement of Malvern town
centre through the implementation of appropriate
traffic management measures
To work with rail industry partners to identify and
implement improvements to Great Malvern and
Malvern Link stations, especially through the
improvement of car parking facilities at Malvern
Link
To work with partners including Herefordshire and
Shropshire County Councils to improve
passenger transport links between Tenbury and
neighbouring destinations, using accessibility
mapping to identify major opportunities for
service enhancements
To work with partners to identify and implement
transport measures that will support town centre
enhancement schemes within Upton-upon-Severn
To support measures to minimise the impact of
traffic upon local communities within the Malvern
Hills AONB area
2006-11 WCC; MHDC;
MHSP; QinetiQ;
AWM
2006-11 WCC; MHDC;
Town Council
2006-11 WCC; MHDC;
DfT; NR; TOC
2006-11 WCC; HC; SCC;
MHDC; Town
Council; Bus
operators; CT
2006-11 WCC; MHDC;
Upton Town
Council
2006-11 WCC; MHDC;
MHAONB
AWM; QinetiQ;
MHSP
MHDC; Town
Council; Developer
(S106);
LTP; NR; TOC;
Developer (S106)
WCC; WAP;
Herefordshire;
Shropshire; Bus
operators
MHDC; Upton Town
Council; LTP
LTP1
N/a
WCC3
BVPI102
N/A
Failure to secure relevant planning
approval, Traffic Regulation Orders
and land acquisition necessary to
permit full package of
improvements to go ahead
Failure to identify appropriate
measures that can be
accommodated without having a
detrimental impact elsewhere in the
town
Limited funding restricts
opportunities to achieve
improvements at stations
Failure to identify suitable package
of improvements, or obtain funding
to procure improvements
Failure to agree on a package of
improvements within Upton
WCC; MHDC; AONB N/A Failure to secure funding for a
package of improvements
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; MHDC = Malvern Hills District Council; NR = Network Rail; TOC = Train Operating Company;
HC = Herefordshire Council; SCC = Shropshire County Council; AWM = Advantage West Midlands; MHSP = Malvern Science and Technology Park;
DfT = Department for Transport; CT = Community Transport providers; MHAONB = Malvern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

LTP
Strategy
REDD1
REDD2
REDD3
REDD4
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Measure Risk
Redditch
To support the implementation of bus infrastructure
improvements identified through the Redditch Bus Quality
Partnership
To support the implementation of the agreed transport
strategy for North Redditch should the Abbey Stadium redevelopment
proposals gain planning approval during the
LTP2 period, including a contribution towards the Bordesley
Bypass element of the package from the LTP2 budget
To work with the Redditch Community Safety Partnership to
identify opportunities to improve the footpath and subway
networks within Redditch aimed at making people feel safer
when using the network
To work with Warwickshire County Council and the Highways
Agency to identify the appropriate transport strategy that will
minimise the impact of traffic on the environment of Southeast
Redditch and the neighbouring communities within
Warwickshire
2006-11 WCC; RBC; Bus
operators; NHS
2007-09 RBC; Atlantic
Beacon;
2006-11 WCC; RBC;
WMC; RCSP
2006-11 WCC;
Warwickshire
CC; HA; RBC
LTP; RBC; Bus
operators; NHS
RBC; Developer
(S106); LTP
BVPI102
LTP1
Failure to maintain
partnership or to agree
priorities for action
Abbey Stadium
development failures to
secure planning approval
following Public Inquiry.
Bordesley Bypass fails to
secure planning approval.
LTP; RBC; N/A Limited funding constrains
ability to make wide-scale
improvements to the
network
HA;
Warwickshire;
WCC
N/A
Failure to identify an
appropriate solution to
traffic problems in this area
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; RBC = Redditch Borough Council; NHS = National Health Service; WMC = West Mercia Constabulary;
RCSP = Redditch Community Safety Partnership; HA = Highways Agency;

LTP
Strategy
WOR1
WOR2
WOR3
WOR4
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Worcester
To continue implementation of the Sustainable Travel 2006-09 WCC; Worcester City DfT; LTP;
LTP2; LTP3;
Town project, to improve walking, cycling and public
Council; Public transport Developer LTP4;
transport infrastructure to support the project, to share
operators; SWPCT; UoW; (S106);
WCC1;
experience gained from the project with other local
Darlington Borough Council; Worcester City WCC2;
highway authorities, and to apply the best practice
Peterborough City Council; Council; UoW;
measures identified through the project throughout
DfT
SWPCT
Worcestershire
To introduce a network of express bus services within
Worcester linking a network of Transport Interchange
hubs to key destinations across the city, supported by
connecting local taxibus services and the
implementation of appropriate passenger transport
infrastructure
To construct a Parkway station at the intersection of
the Worcester – London and Birmingham – Bristol
railway lines at Norton, South-east of Worcester
To implement a package of improvements on the
A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road to reduce
congestion on this critical route
2006-11 WCC; Bus operators;
Worcester City Council; Taxi
operators;
2010/11 DfT; NR; Laing Rail; WCC;
TOC; WDC
LTP; Bus
operators;
Worcester City
Council; WCC;
Developer (S106)
LTP; DfT; NR;
Laing Rail; TOC;
Developer (S106)
LTP2;
BVPI102;
WCC3
Headline Risks
Failure to apply
best practice
learning elsewhere
in the County
Failure to secure
funding to allow
project to continue
beyond 2009
Limited funding
des not allow full
roll-out of Project
Express across
the city.
Failure to secure
Traffic Regulation
Orders for bus
priority measures.
Failure to secure
planning approval
for Park and Ride
sites
Failure to secure
approval for the
business case for
the Station
Failure to identify
funding package
for the station.
2006-09 WCC; HA LTP; WCC Limited funding
only permits a
partial solution to
be completed.

LTP
Strategy
WOR5
WOR6
Policy Timetable Partners Funding Sources LTP
Indicator
Worcester
To implement measures to support the general 2006-16 WCC; Worcester Regional Transport LTP2
improvement of Worcester city centre and to
City Council; City Funds; Developer
provide a traffic-free environment at key locations
Centre Forum; UoW (S106); LTP; Worcester
such as Worcester Cathedral
City Council
To undertake a transportation and land use study
to identify the long-term transport strategy for
Worcester to enable the city to fulfil its subregional
role
2006-07 WCC; Worcester
City Council; MHDC;
WDC; HA
Headline Risks
Failure to reach
agreement on the future
Masterplan for
Worcester
WCC; HA; TIF N/A Failure to complete
initial study by 2007.
Failure to agree
appropriate future
strategy with partners
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; NHS = National Health Service; HA = Highways Agency; UoW = University of Worcester;
DfT = Department for Transport; NR = Network Rail; TOC = Train Operating Companies; MHDC = Malvern Hills District Council;
WDC = Wychavon District Council; TIF = Transport Innovation Fund

LTP
Strategy
WYCH1
WYCH2
WYCH3
WYCH4
WYCH5
WYCH6
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Wychavon
To work in partnership with Wychavon District Council, 2007-09 WCC; WDC; LTP; WDC;
Evesham Town Council and Advantage West Midlands to
Evesham Town AWM;
implement transport improvements within Evesham High
Council; AWM; Developer
Street as part of the Market Towns Transportation
T2000
(S106)
Initiative
To work in partnership with Wychavon District Council
and Pershore Town Council to implement transport
improvements in Pershore High Street to address safety,
environmental and traffic management issues as part of
the Market Towns Transport Initiative
To review the operation of the Pinvin Crossroads to
identify ways to reduce congestion at this location, and
work towards the construction of the Keytec Link Road
should developer funding become available for this
scheme
To work with the District Council and Droitwich Town
Council to identify transport improvements that would
benefit the town centre and implement these through the
Market Towns Transport Initiative
To implement measures identified through the Vale of
Evesham FQP to minimise the impact of heavy goods
vehicles on local communities whilst supporting the
continuing development of the agricultural industry in the
area
To support measures to minimise the impact of traffic
upon local communities within the Cotswold AONB area
2006/07 WCC; WDC;
Pershore Town
Council
2006-11 WCC; WDC;
Developer
2006-11 WCC; WDC;
Droitwich Town
Council; BW
2006-11 WCC; WDC;
FQP
2006-11 WCC; WDC;
Cotswold AONB;
CALC
LTP; WDC;
Developer
(S106)
Developer
(S106)
WDC; BW;
WCC;
Developer
(S106)
LTP; FQP;
WDC;
Developers
(S106)
LTP
Indicator
LTP1;
LTP2
LTP1;
BVPI99
N/a
LTP1
N/A
Headline Risks
Limited funding constrains the
scope of the scheme that can
be achieved within the town
Limited funding constrains the
extent of the scheme that can
be implemented
No current plans for further
development at Keytec,
therefore scheme unlikely to
proceed in LTP2 period
Limited funding available to
implement any scheme
Limited funding for the
implementation of large-scale
schemes within the Vale
Failure to agree on necessary
measures within the area
AONB; LTP N/A Limited funding to permit
identified schemes to go
ahead.
Notes: WCC = Worcestershire County Council; WDC = Wychavon District Council; AWM = Advantage West Midlands; BW = British Waterways;
FQP = Freight Quality Partnership; CALC = Town / Parish Councils; AONB = Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

LTP
Strategy
WF1
WF2
WF3
WF4
WF5
WF6
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Wyre Forest
To work with Wyre Forest District Council to identify and 2008-11 WCC; WFDC; LTP;
implement an appropriate traffic management scheme to
Developers Developer
reduce traffic emissions on the A451 at Horsefair, and to
(S106)
enable the AQMA designation to be removed
To undertake a transportation study for the Wyre Forest
area which will result in the identification of the preferred
transport strategy to support the economic regeneration
of the Stourport Road Employment Corridor. This will
form the basis for a future major scheme funding bid for
implementation of the strategy within the LTP3 period
To work with rail industry partners, Wyre Forest District
Council and the Severn Valley Railway to undertake
improvements at Kidderminster Railway Station that will
improve accessibility within and to the station, improve
the connectivity between the station and the town centre,
and improve bus / rail interchange
To implement a package of traffic management measures
within Bewdley to enhance the town centre environment,
including the improvement of air quality and safety within
Welch Gate, enabling the AQMA designation to be
removed
To work with Stourport Forward partners to identify and
implement a package of transportation measures to
reduce congestion and improve the environment within
Stourport town centre
To support the work of the Wyre Forest Bus Quality
Partnership by helping the development of a fully
integrated, affordable public and community transport
network for Wyre Forest, providing the opportunity for
seamless multi-modal journeys
2006-07 WCC; WFDC;
British Sugar;
AWM; HA
2006-11 WCC; WFDC;
NR; TOC; SVR;
Developers
2006-08 WCC; WFDC;
OB
2006-11 WCC; WFDC;
Stourport
Forward;
Developers; BW
2006-11 WCC; IPTF;
WFDC; BQP;
WCC; WFDC;
HA; British
Sugar
LTP; NR;
WFDC; TOC;
Developer
(S106)
LTP
Indicator
LTP8
N/A
LTP1
Headline Risks
Failure to identify an appropriate
strategy to reduce traffic
emissions
Failure to complete study in time
to influence regional agenda.
Failure to identify an appropriate
strategy for the Wyre Forest area
Limited funding to implement full
package of improvements
LTP; LTP8 Failure to identify a suitable
package of measures that will
address air quality and road
safety issues at this location
without a detrimental impact
elsewhere in the town
LAA; WFDC;
Developer
(S106)
LTP; WCC;
WFDC; Bus
operators
LTP2
BVPI102
Limited funding constrains the
type of package which could be
implemented within the town
Partnership fails to agree on
suitable improvements within the
Wyre Forest area.
Limited funding constrains the
schemes that can proceed.

LTP
Strategy
WF7
WF8
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Wyre Forest
To work with the Highways Agency to develop the future 2006-11 HA;
strategy for the management of the A449 and A456 Trunk
WCC
Road routes
To undertake a review of all aspects of school transport
provision, including School Travel Plans, as part of the
Wyre Forest schools review, and in particular to identify
opportunities for better integration of school bus services
2006-08 WCC WCC;
LTP
LTP
Indicator
Headline Risks
HA LTP2 Failure to agree on the appropriate
management strategy and funding
requirement resulting in an adversarial
approach to the de-Trunking process
LTP4;
WCC1
Limited funding constrains the extent to
which measures can be implemented
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; WFDC = Wyre Forest District Council; AWM = Advantage West Midlands; BW = British Waterways;
NR = Network Rail; TOC = Train Operating Company; SVR = Severn Valley Railway; OB = Opportunity Bewdley; SF = Stourport Forward; HA = Highways Agency
IPTF = Joint Members Integrated Passenger Transport Forum

LTP
Strategy
TAMP1
TAMP2
TAMP3
TAMP4
TAMP5
TAMP6
TAMP7
TAMP8
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Asset Management
To produce a Transportation Asset Management Plan for
Worcestershire, setting out the County Council’s forward
strategy for the maintenance of transportation assets
To maintain the highway network and other transportation
assets to a suitable standard that permits the safe passage of
people and goods within Worcestershire
To maintain bridges and other structures to ensure the safe
passage of people and goods on the highway and rights of
way network
To review the current provision of crossing points on the River
Severn through Worcestershire and identify improvements to
those crossing points to ensure efficiency of movement
across the County
To adopt the recommendations of the Code of Practice
“Management of Highway Structures” and achieve milestone 3
compliance by 2009
To maintain street lighting to a high standard to ensure
personal security and safety for all travellers and to minimise
the environmental impact of street lighting in the form of light
pollution and energy use
To review signing, road markings and other street furniture as
part of any major maintenance scheme to minimize street
clutter and improve the environment within local communities
and in rural areas
To undertake a pilot project to reduce street clutter along the
B4084 (old A44) route between Eve sham and the M5 Junction
7 to permit an assessment of the safety impact of street clutter
minimisation to be assessed
LTP
Indicator
Headline Risks
2006/07 WCC WCC N/a Limited resources delay
publication of the Plan
2006-11 WCC LTP (SM);
WCC
2006-11 WCC LTP(SM);
WCC
2006-11 WCC LTP (SM);
WCC; LTP
(Major
Scheme)
BVPI 223;
BVPI224;
BVPI187
N/a
N/A
Limited funding constrains
ability to maintain network
adequately
Limited funding constrains
ability to maintain bridges
adequately resulting in
restrictions / closure with
consequential impact on local
economy
Insufficient resources to permit
full review to be undertaken
2006-09 WCC WCC N/A Limited resources mean that
Milestone 3 compliance not
achieved to programme
2006-11 WCC WCC;
LTP(SM)
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Town
Councils
2007-09 WCC;
WDC;
N/A
Limited funding means that
lighting upgrades and
replacement not undertaken
quickly enough to maintain
standards
LTP N/A Reducing street clutter causes
consequential safety problems
LTP; WDC N/A Reducing street clutter results
in increased safety problems

LTP
Strategy
TAMP9
TAMP10
TAMP11
Policy Timetable Partners Funding
Sources
Asset Management
To revise the County Council’s Transportation Design Guide
to set out clearly to developers the requirements in relation to
meeting the transportation impact of new developments
To work with developers, Local Planning Authorities and other
public and private sector organizations to ensure that the
transport impact of new development is properly assessed at
all stages of the planning process, and that appropriate
transport strategies are put in place and funded for each
development which are compatible with the LTP2 strategy
To ensure that funding to support the LTP2 strategy is
secured from developments where clear links are
demonstrated between the travel demand generated by that
development proposal and the schemes and strategies
outlined within LTP2
LTP
Indicator
Headline Risks
2006/07 WCC WCC N/A Failure to reach agreement with
Local Planning Authorities on the
application of the Design Guide
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Developers
2006-11 WCC; DC;
Developers
Developers
(S106)
Developers
(S106)
N/A
N/A
Failure to reach agreement on
appropriate transport strategies
for individual developments.
Failure to get Local Planning
Authority support through
appropriate planning conditions
to ensure suitable contributions
to LTP strategy are made by
developers.
Failure to get Local Planning
Authority support through
appropriate planning conditions
to ensure suitable contributions
to LTP strategy are made by
developers.
Notes:
WCC = Worcestershire County Council; WDC = Wychavon District Council; DC = District Councils

APPENDIX FOUR – LTP2 FRAMEWORK APPRAISAL

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: INTEGRATED PASSENGER TRANSPORT STRATEGY
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Strong - supports Worcester sub-regional role & Central Technology Belt
Social: Strong –likely to improve local accessibility within Worcester through improved
reach of bus services
Spatial Planning: Strong - Links to Worcester Local Plan and the future development
of the city. Specific links to future developments such as Rugby Club expansion and
Grove Farm employment site
Housing: Moderate – supports Worcester housing growth through sub-regional role,
but limited link age to housing growth in the short term
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Moderate – early evidence from
Worcester North shows increase in passenger numbers, but no clear evidence on
impact on traffic flows within the city
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – would provide greater security of passenger
transport network through better bus stops and buses
Better Environment: Strong –improved bus services will assist with achieving modal
shift thereby contributing to a better local environment
Economic success: Moderate - supports future developments such as Rugby Club
expansion and Grove Farm employment site by providing better accessibility by public
transport
Improved Health: Moderate – will encourage walking (to/from bus stops) and seek to
improve air quality (reduced car use for local trips) thereby giving health benefits
Young People: Strong – improved accessibility for younger people by making bus
travel more affordable – as long as concessionary fares schemes for younger people
are supported
Stronger communities: Strong – Project Express is crucial to achieving the specific
LAA target to increase bus patronage
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence – although early
patronage figures for Project Express in Worcester are promising, it is too early to be
sure of overall impact of the improvements
Environment: Strong – compliant with SEA objectives
Individual
Score
High
High
High
Medium
Medium
Individual
Score
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
High
High
Individual
Score
No clear
evidence
High
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
HIGH
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate – Rugby Club Park and Ride still requires Medium Overall
planning – could risk delivery in 06/07
Score
Risk Assessment: Moderate – might not secure planning approval or TROs Medium MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
68% HIGH
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – no impact on existing AQMAs, only emerging
sites (1%)
- Accessibility (47%): Strong – better access to facilities within Worcester by
public transport (47%)

- Congestion (30%): Potential – transfer of car journeys to bus / Park and
Ride would help tackle congestion in Worcester (15%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – reduction in car journeys within Worcester may result
in some casualty reduction (5%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact – no significant impact on maintenance
of transport assets (0%)
- Linkages between Projects : Links to Worcester Sustainable Town and
Developments
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Moderate – meets national policies to reduce car use and
promote accessibility by passenger transport
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from City Council, NHS, Rugby Club and
AWM.
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – supports Worcester subregional
role
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County Councillors for promotion of
Project Express
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – direct impact on BVPI’s relating to Bus Patronage and
Bus User Satisfaction
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact (£
millions)
Partnership: Potential – funding from bus operators into new buses, City Council into
new bus shelters etc.. To be confirmed.
Developer: Potential – potential for significant developer funding from Grove Farm,
Worcester Woods, UCW. Some funding already secured for Newtown Road Bus
Priority
Other: Potential – funding from fare box to offset operating costs – aim is for
commercial services that provide surplus for re-investment
Moderate
Strong
Sub-
Regional
Strong
Strong
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: RAIL STRATEGY
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Strong - Supports Central Technology Belt through improvements at
railway stations close to CTB core sites at Malvern, Bromsgrove and at economic
regeneration site at Kidderminster
Social: Moderate – improves accessibility to facilities at a sub-regional or regional level
by improving attractiveness of rail travel
Spatial Planning: Strong – railway stations form focii for development for housing,
employment and retail / leisure
Housing: Moderate – potential housing developments planned near to Bromsgrove
and Malvern Link stations
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Moderate – transfer to rail travel
from car would help reduce vehicle emissions – Bromsgrove to Birmingham corridor is
particularly important
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – would provide greater security of passenger transport
network through better passenger facilities at rail stations
Better Environment: Strong –improved rail services will assist with achieving modal
shift thereby contributing to a better local environment
Economic success: Strong - supports accessibility to and development of key
employment sites within Central Technology Belt
Improved Health: Moderate – will encourage walking (to/from stations) and seek to
improve air quality (reduced car use for regional trips) thereby giving health benefits
Young People: Slight – rail is a relatively expensive mode of travel for younger people,
therefore likely to have little impact
Stronger communities: Slight – no specific impact on building stronger communities
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence – programme of
schemes, limited evidence for impact
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives by making rail an attractive alternative
to car travel for sub-regional / regional trips
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate – will require partnership funding from rail
industry or other sources, as well as delivery through rail industry partners
Risk Assessment: High – very dependent upon funding and project support from
various rail industry partners. May rely on franchise process which offers uncertainty
Individual
Score
High
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Individual
Score
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Individual
Score
No clear
evidence
High
Medium
Low
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
68% HIGH
- Air Quality (2%): Moderate – potential for removal of car trips from
Bromsgrove AQMA through transfer to rail (1%)
- Accessibility (47%): Strong – improved accessibility to rail services (47%)
- Congestion (30%): Moderate – potential to transfer trips from car to rail on

key corridors (Malvern – Worcester and Bromsgrove to Birmingham) thereby
contributing to reducing congestion (15%)
- Safety (15%): Limited - transfer of car trips to rail may improve overall safety
by diverting trips to a safer mode of travel (5%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact - no significant impact on maintenance
of transport assets (0%)
- Linkages between Projects : High – links to other projects such as AQMA,
Project Express, Sustainable Travel Initiatives.
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Low – provision of rail services is not a County Council function Low LOW
Partnership Commitment: Moderate – Network Rail are supportive, but have no
specific budgets for station enhancements. Train Operating Companies are in a state of
flux – re-franchising process for Central and Cross County in 2007.
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – schemes primarily will
support sub-regional and regional travel
Political Commitment: Strong – desire for improvement in rail services is strong at a
County and District level – especially within Malvern, Worcester and Wyre Forest
CPA Core Indicators: Slight – no BVPI or Mandatory LTP targets relate to rail
patronage
Funding
LTP2: Low Level – partnership funding only as full funding of projects will be prohibitive
(

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: WORCESTERSHIRE PARKWAY
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Strong - Supports Worcester sub-regional role & Central Technology Belt
Social: Moderate - improves accessibility to national rail services
Spatial Planning: Strong – specifically included in Wychavon Local Plan and in RSS
Transport Strategy
Housing: Limited – no links to Regional Housing Strategy
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Strong – forms specific part of
RSS Strategic Park and Ride proposals for Birmingham aimed at reducing car use for
travel into the conurbation
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Slight – minor road safety benefit from modal shift
Better Environment: Strong –improved access to national rail services will give
greater opportunity to improve local environment by achieving modal shift
Economic success: Strong - supports development of Central Technology Belt by
providing easy access to national rail services for Worcestershire
Improved Health: Slight – Parkway Station will still encourage local car journeys to
access the facility – relatively limited health benefits from this
Young People: Slight – rail is a relatively expensive mode of travel for younger
people, and the type of traveller attracted is unlikely to be from this group
Stronger communities: Moderate – will promote stronger communities indirectly by
supporting economic growth within the County
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: 1.5:1
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives by promoting rail for regional /
national journeys
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate - Still requires acceptance from DfT and
partnership funding to be sourced
Risk Assessment: High – vulnerable if support / acceptance from DfT Rail is not
forthcoming, and partnership funding is crucial to scheme.
Individual
Score
High
Medium
High
Low
High
Individual
Score
Low
High
High
Low
Low
Medium
Individual
Score
Medium
High
Medium
Low
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
57% MEDIUM
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – no AQMAs directly benefit (0%)
- Accessibility (47%): Strong – better access to national rail services for
South Worcestershire (47%)
- Congestion (30%): Limited – new station will remove some journeys from
M5 corridor, but rail corridor will not have capacity to make significant
difference (5%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – transfer of car trips to a safer mode of travel will
have some casualty reduction potential (5%)

- Asset Management (6%): No impact - no impact on transport asset
management (0%)
- Linkages between Projects : High – complements Project Express strategy
for Worcester, and Rail Strategy
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Strong – only transport scheme in Worcestershire which is
specifically mentioned in RSS
Strong
HIGH
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from District Councils (Worcester and
Wychavon) and from Laing Rail, as well as WMRA / AWM.
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Regional – scheme specifically named in
Regional Transport Strategy as an element of the Strategic Park and Ride Strategy for
the West Midlands
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County and District Councillors for
delivery of Parkway
CPA Core Indicators: Moderate – no specific BVPI or mandatory LTP2 targets relating
to rail patronage. Regional targets relating to Park and Ride car parking spaces
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact (£1
million contribution agreed with Laing Rail)
Partnership: Potential – funding from Laing Rail agreed in principle – full business
case to be established
Developer: Limited – some potential for developer funding if adjacent land developed,
but significant development contrary to Wychavon Local Plan
Other: Potential – funding from Train Operating Companies securing new franchise
could be possible. Also – funding from revenue generated by new trips from the station.
Strong
Regional
Strong
Moderate
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: RIGHTS OF WAY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – some potential impact on tourism within Worcestershire by
providing more attractive Rights of Way for leisure
Social: Strong - Improves local accessibility especially in rural areas (e.g. better
connections to village shop / school)
Spatial Planning: Limited – general support in Local Plans
Housing: Limited – no specific links to housing proposals
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Limited – may reduce some local
car journeys in rural areas
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – investment in Rights of Way network to make it safer
to use
Better Environment: Strong –improved access to the countryside resulting in a
greater appreciation of the local environment by local communities
Economic success: Slight – some impact on local economy through greater use of
Rights of Way network by tourists and day-trippers
Improved Health: Strong – encouragement of walking, cycling and horse riding
through investment in a better Rights of Way network will lead to a healthier population
Young People: Moderate – encouragement of younger people to make better use of
the countryside through investment in Rights of Way
Stronger communities: Slight – investment in Rights of Way may help to promote
stronger rural communities
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives on encouraging walking and cycling,
promoting health, and sustainable travel
Individual
Score
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
Medium
High
Low
High
Medium
Low
Individual
Score
No clear
evidence
High
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Deliverability Assessment: High – schemes relatively easy to deliver High Overall
Score
Risk Assessment - Low: Wide programme of minor works likely to be identified as
the ROWIP is developed.
High
HIGH
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
36% LOW
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – no AQMAs likely to be affected (0%)
- Accessibility (47%): Moderate – improved access to facilities in rural
areas and to leisure routes (25%)
- Congestion (30%): Limited - Unlikely to have impact on congestion as
largely applies to rural areas (0%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – might result in some safer routes in rural areas
(5%)

- Asset Management (6%): Strong – improved maintenance of ROW network
(6%)
- Linkages between Projects: Moderate – links to Sustainable Travel
Initiatives and Accessibility Strategy
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Statutory – Rights of Way Improvement Plan is a statutory
requirement and Government will expect the implementation of the Plan
Statutory
HIGH
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from District Councils and other partners
in Local Access Forum
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme: Sub-regional – ROWIP covers subregion
of Worcestershire
Political Commitment: Moderate – general support from County Councillors for
improvement of Rights of Way
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – direct impact on BVPI relating to ease of use of the
Rights of Way network
Funding
LTP2: Medium Level – will require reasonable investment to have the necessary
impact (£330K a year identified by Countryside Service)
Partnership: Limited – funding from District Councils and from Countryside Agency?
Developer: Limited – potential for limited developer funding – generally diversion
costs for Rights of Way directly affected by a development
Other: Limited – other sources of funding difficult to identify
Strong
Sub-
Regional
Moderate
Strong
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL INITIATIVES
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – will support sustainable economic development in line with RSS
strategy
Social: Strong – supports community strategies through the implementation of local
schemes to promote sustainable transport
Spatial Planning: Moderate – support sustainable development policies from RSS and
Local Plans
Housing: Limited – supports sustainable housing developments, but limited overall
impact.
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Strong – measures will support
reduction in car use for local trips, thereby contributing to reduction in vehicle emissions
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Strong – investment in better walking and cycle networks and
School Travel Plans will contribute to improved community safety through better facilities
for local trips
Better Environment: Strong – improved walking and cycle networks and School Travel
Plan investment will help achieve modal shift for local journeys, contributing to overall
environmental objectives
Economic success: Moderate – will provide better facilities for local trips to
employment sites
Improved Health: Strong – will encourage walking and cycling as modes of travel
thereby seeking to influence local people to adopt a healthier lifestyle
Young People: Strong – investment specifically targeted at School Travel Plans will
directly impact on younger people
Stronger communities: Moderate – investment in local facilities to improve walking and
cycling facilities, particularly based on schools, will promote stronger communities
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence. Some evidence for
effectiveness of School Travel Plans, Employer Travel Plans and in Cycling Strategy for
reduction in car trips and increase in cycling (APR)
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives through promoting sustainable travel
Deliverability Assessment: Strong – large programme of schemes across a range of
strategies means that whilst individual schemes may prove difficult to achieve the overall
programme should be easily delivered
Risk Assessment: Low – whilst individual schemes may require land / planning etc.,
delivery of whole programme is low risk
Individual
Score
Low
High
Medium
Low
High
Individual
Score
High
High
Medium
High
High
Medium
Individual
Score
Medium
High
High
High
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
73% HIGH
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – small number of schemes may have impact on
AQMA’s (1%)
- Accessibility (47%): Strong – major objective of programme is to implement

schemes that will improve local accessibility (47%)
- Congestion (30%): Potential – may help to tackle local congestion,
particularly in the vicinity of schools, by reducing car trips for local journeys
(15%)
- Safety (15%): Potential – has potential to improve safety for vulnerable road
users by providing improved facilities (10%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact - no impact on transport asset
management (0%)
- Linkages between Projects : Supports Project Express, Worcester
Sustainable Travel Town, National Cycle Network
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Strong – political commitment to implementation of School Travel
Plans, and national support through DfES strategy
Strong
HIGH
Partnership Commitment: Strong – support from District Councils, Community
Strategies, and other agencies (e.g. Sustrans)
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – programme covers subregion
of Worcestershire
Political Commitment: Strong – strong support from County Councillors for School
Travel Plans, as well as for construction of a joined up cycle network and local measures
such as pedestrian crossings
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – impact on LTP2 Mandatory Indicators relating to modal
share for school trips and the number of cycling trips. Cycle trips a core indicator for
CPA.
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact (£
millions) across these areas (e.g. (£2.7 million for School Travel Plans would only give
£10K per school). Walk / Cycle schemes need £500K a year to make a significant
difference
Partnership: Potential – funding from DfES for School Travel Plans (£5-10K per
school), partner funding for cycle schemes from Districts and SUSTRANS.
Developer: Potential – potential for developer funding for local walk / cycle schemes
related to development, and for connections to key facilities relevant for that development
Other: Limited – other potential funding sources?
Strong
Sub-
Regional
Strong
Strong
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Moderate – improved traffic management may make economic
development sites in Worcester and Wyre Forest easier to access, thereby supporting
Worcester’s sub-regional role and Kidderminster regeneration
Social: Limited – better information for the travelling public will make planning journeys
easier
Spatial Planning: Moderate – better traffic management and information supported
through Local Plans
Housing: Limited – improved traffic management may make some housing sites easier
to access, especially in Worcester city centre
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Strong – better traffic management
in city / town centres will help reduce congestion and vehicle emissions. Better travel
information will also encourage public transport use rather than car.
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – more efficient traffic management systems in town
and city centres should lead to improvements in safety for all road users
Better Environment: Strong –better traffic management and travel information will
help to alleviate air quality and environmental problems associated with traffic
congestion
Economic success: Strong – supports town and city centre development within
Worcester and Wyre Forest through better traffic management and bus priority
Improved Health: Moderate – will encourage walking and cycling by providing better
crossing facilities within the UTC centre and by promoting public transport
Young People: Slight – no specific impact on younger people
Stronger communities: Strong – ability to provide bus priority, better traffic
management and better travel information is critical to the achievement of LAA targets
on bus patronage and congestion / highways satisfaction
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives of tackling congestion through better
traffic management and better travel information
Deliverability Assessment: High – technology has been shown to work elsewhere.
Some planning issues over location of base stations for Real Time Passenger
Information.
Risk Assessment : Low - technology has been proven, therefore low risk to
implementation
Individual
Score
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
High
Individual
Score
Medium
High
High
Medium
Low
High
Individual
Score
No clear
evidence
High
High
High
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
72% HIGH
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – unlikely to affect known AQMAs, but will help
reduce traffic at emerging sites (1%)
- Accessibility (47%): Moderate – better travel information will encourage

people to make more use of passenger transport. Improved traffic
management at signals may give better pedestrian crossing facilities (25%)
- Congestion (30%): Strong – improved traffic management systems will
reduce congestion within city / town centres, whlst better passenger information
may encourage modal shift (30%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – better traffic management systems should make city /
town centre networks safer for all road users (10%)
- Asset Management (6%): Strong– improved traffic information will assist
transport asset management (6%)
- Linkages between Projects: Strong – link to Project Express, Sustainable
Travel Town, Sustainable Travel Initiatives, and Asset Management Plan
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Statutory – Traffic Management Act requires authorities to
improve traffic management and incident management on local highway networks
Partnership Commitment: Strong – support from Worcester City Council and Wyre
Forest District Council, as well as Police (potential partnership funding for ANPR
systems in Worcester) and bus operators.
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – full project will involve
introduction of Real Time Passenger Information across the County
Political Commitment: Strong – Worcester City and Wyre Forest District Councils both
support the introduction of ITS
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – direct impact on BVPI’s relating to Bus Patronage and
Bus User Satisfaction and to LTP2 Mandatory Indicators
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact (£
millions)
Partnership: Potential – West Mercia Police likely to have additional funding for ANPR
cameras and Worcester City for CCTV
Developer: Potential – potential to secure developer funding from planned
developments in and around Worcester and Kidderminster
Other: Potential – funding from fare box or LAA to offset operating costs – aim is for
commercial services that provide surplus for re-investment
Strong
Strong
Sub-
Regional
Strong
Strong
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: WORCESTER SOUTHERN LINK ROAD
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Strong - Supports Worcester sub-regional role & Central Technology Belt
by tackling existing congestion constraints on future development
Social: Limited – limited impact on social issues
Spatial Planning: Strong – significant impact on ability of Worcester to develop west of
River Severn, and on Malvern
Housing: Strong – existing congestion is a constraint on future housing growth within
Worcester, as well as development in Malvern (DERA North)
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Moderate – some congestion relief
and reduction in emissions will result from junction improvements to achieve freer flowing
traffic.
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – safety benefits for travellers using the Southern Link,
including pedestrians and cyclists seeking to cross the road
Better Environment: Limited – will not significantly reduce congestion, therefore
emissions still likely to be a problem
Economic success: Moderate – will assist with the development of some employment
sites e.g. Grove Farm but will not resolve the full congestion issue
Improved Health: Limited – will not significantly reduce emissions or encourage
walking /cycling, therefore no major contribution to health benefits
Young People: Limited – no specific impact on younger people
Stronger communities: Strong – reduction in congestion on Southern Link would help
meet specific targets relating to public perception of highways service and to tackling
congestion (although specific target for congestion relates to Stourport)
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: Moderate - Modelling shows that junction
improvements will improve the existing situation, but will not totally remove congestion
Environment: Moderate – partially supports SEA objectives by reducing congestion and
vehicle emissions, although land-take at some junctions and impact on flood plain could
be issues
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate - Some land required to deliver some
improvements at Whittington and Ketch. Construction will create problems that are
worse than current position – this could erode benefits of the scheme
Risk Assessment: Moderate – potential for planning problems / consultation problems
– especially at the Ketch and Whittington. Land acquisition required for some junctions.
Public utilities may be a problem at Ketch (pylon / oil pipeline)
Individual
Score
High
Low
High
High
Medium
Individual
Score
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
Low
High
Individual
Score
Medium
Medium
Medium
Medium
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
40% MEDIUM
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – unlikely to significantly reduce traffic flows at
emerging AQMA’s within Worcester. (0%)
- Accessibility (47%): Limited – some opportunity for bus priority at Powick and

etter crossing facilities for pedestrians / cyclists across the ring road (10%)
- Congestion (30%): Moderate– will reduce congestion on WSL to a limited
extent but will not resolve overall capacity problem – this requires another river
crossing (15%)
- Safety (15%): Strong – improvements will address safety problems at
existing junctions (most of these are cluster sites) (15%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact – no impact on transport asset
management (0%)
- Linkages between Projects: Improved access to Worcester Parkway, and
some bus priority and walk / cycle improvements to support Project Express /
Sustainable Travel Town
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Limited – function to tackle congestion and meet obligations of
Traffic Management Act as well as tackling casualty reduction
Partnership Commitment: Strong – support from Worcester City Council, Malvern Hill
District Council, Highways Agency (impact on M5 Junction 7), and economic
development agencies (Chamber of Commerce, AWM, CTB)
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – supports Worcester subregional
role, and access to south-west Worcestershire including Malvern
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County Councillors to be seen to tackle
congestion on the Southern Link Road
CPA Core Indicators: Limited – no CPA or LTP2 Mandatory indicators relate
specifically to congestion
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact
(£5.4 million to tackle all four junctions)
Partnership: Limited – no source of partnership funding identified
Developer: Potential – potential to secure developer funding from Grove Farm / Earls
Court Farm developments on west side of Worcester
Other: Limited– no prospect of funding from other sources – TIF unlikely pending other
pilot projects
Low
Strong
Sub-
Regional
Strong
Limited
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: MARKET TOWNS TRANSPORT INITIATIVE
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Strong – town centre enhancements support RSS objective to safeguard
role of Market Towns
Social: Moderate – supports local communities by promoting improved town centre
environments
Spatial Planning: Moderate – supports Local Plan aspirations (Wychavon and Wyre
Forest) to enhance market towns
Housing: Limited – would assist limited town centre housing proposals in these
communities
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Moderate – will help reduce
congestion in Evesham and Stourport town centres, thereby contributing to reducing
vehicle emissions
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – would contribute to the provision of safer road layouts
within four Market Towns
Better Environment: Strong – scheme would focus on providing improved physical
environments within the four town centres
Economic success: Strong - supports the role of market towns as part of the
Worcestershire economy by making them more attractive places to visit
Improved Health: Moderate – will encourage walking and cycling within the market
towns by providing pleasanter and safer environments for pedestrians and cyclists
Young People: Slight – no specific impact on younger people
Stronger communities: Strong – will assist in the development of market towns and a
specific indicator within the LAA relates to tackling congestion in Stourport
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives of reducing impact of vehicles on town
centre environments and promotion of walking and cycling for local trips
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate – planning / land not required. Main issue –
getting consensus on schemes through consultation. This process further advanced in
Evesham than in Stourport
Risk Assessment: Moderate – main risk is getting consensus for a scheme that fits the
available funding for each community
Individual
Score
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
Individual
Score
Medium
High
High
Medium
Low
High
Individual
Score
No clear
evidence
High
Medium
Medium
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
73% HIGH
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – emerging AQMAs might be tackled in Stourport
and Evesham (1%)
- Accessibility (47%): Strong – improving accessibility within town centres by
making it easier to travel within the town centre (47%)
- Congestion (30%): Moderate – tackles congestion in Evesham and

Stourport but unlikely to fully resolve problems in either town (15%)
- Safety (15%): Moderate – will tackle some cluster sites and improve safety for
vulnerable road users within the market towns (10%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact – no specific impact on Transport asset
management (0%)
- Linkages between Projects: Strong - Links to Stourport Bridge and Evesham
Station proposals, as well as to Sustainable Travel Initiatives
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: None – no statutory role, although promotion of market towns is a
regional objective
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from District Councils (Wychavon and
Wyre Forest). Transport 2000 heavily involved in developing the Evesham scheme.
AWM funding being sought for Evesham. Stourport Forward support for scheme in
Stourport.
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – supports Market Towns
Initiative from RSS
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County Councillors for promotion of
Project Express
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – direct impact on BVPI’s relating to Bus Patronage and
Bus User Satisfaction
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact (£3
million full cost for Evesham)
Partnership: Potential – funding from AWM is being sought for Evesham – some
District funding may also be available. Limited funding from Wyre Forest District for
Stourport – for Vale Road crossing
Developer: Potential – developer funding identified for measures in Evesham. Also
likely to secure developer funding for some improvements in Stourport (Lichfield Basin
and Carpets of Worth site)
Other: Potential – if meet LAA target relating to congestion in Stourport there is
potential for LAA reward grant to assist in wider stourport scheme
Low
Strong
Sub-
Regional
Strong
Strong
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: BORDESLEY BYPASS
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Moderate - Supports Redditch re-generation by allowing Abbey Stadium redevelopment
to go ahead without causing traffic problems
Social: Strong - Supports provision of leisure facilities in Redditch which is a high
priority within the Community Strategy
Spatial Planning: Strong - Links to Redditch Local Plan policies on development
proposals for North Redditch
Housing: Limited – no housing implications from provision of Bypass
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Moderate – benefits for Bordesley
village, but new road could generate additional traffic therefore a neutral impact on
emissions is likely
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Slight – would help reduce safety problems in Bordesley village
arising from additional traffic, but no specific safety problems current
Better Environment: Strong – Bypass would promote an improved environment within
Bordesley village, removing existing and development traffic
Economic success: Strong – Bypass is crucial to the development of the Abbey
Stadium commercial leisure facility which is seen as important for Redditch
Improved Health: Moderate – the Bypass itself will have limited impact on health, but
by permitting the Abbey Stadium development to go ahead it will encourage healthier
communities within Redditch through improved access to leisure and fitness facilities
Young People: Moderate – again, the Bypass itself will have relatively little impact for
younger people, but will allow the Abbey Stadium to go ahead providing better access to
leisure facilities for younger people in Redditch
Stronger communities: Slight – The Bypass will have a marginal impact on the
promotion of a strong community in Redditch by allowing the improvement of local leisure
facilities to go ahead.
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: Moderate – traffic impact of Bypass outlined
in Traffic Impact Assessment undertaken for the planning application. This shows
Bypass is effective in its objectives (removing traffic from Bordesley Bypass) but does not
contain a BCR calculation
Environment: Moderate – SEA flags up potential impact of scheme on local
environment – this impact is partially offset by environmental benefits for Bordesley
village
Deliverability Assessment: Strong - Planning approval being sought (application
submitted November 2005). Funding package is in place, and as planning was
previously awarded, the scheme has a strong chance of proceeding.
Risk Assessment: High – partnership funding dependent upon Abbey Stadium
development securing planning approval following Inquiry – the outcome will be known in
Spring 2006.
Individual
Score
Medium
High
High
Low
Medium
Individual
Score
Low
High
High
Medium
Medium
Low
Individual
Score
Medium
Medium
High
Low
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Final
Band
Contribution to Shared Priorities: 50% MEDIUM

- Air Quality (2%): None – no AQMA impact (0%)
- Accessibility (47%): Moderate – would enable some improvements in
Bordesley village for pedestrians, cyclists and bus users (15%)
- Congestion (30%): Strong – would reduce forecast congestion in Bordesley
village resulting from Abbey Stadium development traffic (30%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – would address minor safety problems on existing
network (5%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact – no impact on transport asset
management (0%)
- Linkages between Projects : Links to Abbey Stadium development proposals
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: None Low LOW
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from Redditch Borough Council including
majority funding from RBC and Atlantic Beacon.
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Local – major benefits from scheme would
be experienced at a local level only
Strong
Local
HIGH
LOW
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County and Borough Councillors for Strong HIGH
construction of Bypass and Abbey Stadium development. Strong support from local
community for the Bypass
CPA Core Indicators: Slight – no relevant CPA or LTP2 Mandatory Indicators Slight LOW
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require £1 million LTP2 funding to match fund other contributions
in 2007/08
Partnership: Agreed – Redditch BC has approved £8.4 million funding for the
construction of the Bypass
Developer: Agreed – Atlantic Beacon has agreed a £1.25 million contribution towards
the Bypass costs.
Other: Limited – no other funding sources have been identified to date.

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: ROAD SAFETY STRATEGY
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – major impact is that safer roads would result in less lost time for
employees etc. through injury
Social: Strong – safer and healthier communities would result from investment in
casualty reduction schemes
Spatial Planning: Limited – tackles existing cluster sites and Route Action Plans rather
than specifically aiding spatial plans.
Housing: Limited – not connected to specific housing proposals
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Limited – some casualty reduction
schemes may contribute towards reduction in vehicle emissions by tackling local
congestion, but this is not the main objective of the programme
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Strong – main objective of the strategy is to improve safety for all
road users
Better Environment: Slight – schemes could result in an improved local environment
but this will not be the over-riding drive for each scheme
Economic success: Slight – fewer casualties will result in less time off work for
employees, and fewer costs for NHS etc., but no direct impact on economy
Improved Health: Strong – reducing casualties will have significant benefits for a
healthier community
Young People: Strong – reducing the number of younger people killed or injured on
the road network is a major priority of the road safety strategy
Stronger communities: Moderate – the strategy will seek to support stronger
communities through investment in improved networks
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: Strong - The value for money from
investment in casualty reduction is evidenced by the fact the Worcestershire has
achieved its casualty reduction targets for 2010 by 2005.
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives by promoting safer communities
Deliverability Assessment: Strong – individual schemes may be more difficult to
deliver due to land / planning / consultation issues, but the wider programme can be
delivered with careful planning
Risk Assessment: Low – whilst the risk associated with individual schemes will vary,
the overall programme will generally be deliverable with low risks
Individual
Score
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
High
Low
Low
High
High
Medium
Individual
Score
High
High
High
High
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
49% MEDIUM
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – impact likely only if cluster site in AQMA (1%)
- Accessibility (47%): Moderate – some positive impact likely where a scheme
may promote better access for other road users, especially vulnerable road
users (20%)

- Congestion (30%): Moderate – there may be limited impact where a scheme
may reduce congestion at a junction (10%)
- Safety (15%): Strong – programmes main objective is improving safety for all
road users (15%)
- Asset Management (6%): Moderate – aim is to design improved infrastructure
that can be safely maintained (3%)
- Linkages between Projects : Underpins all other strategies through safety
audit process
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Statutory – statutory duty on the local highway authority to
provide a safe highway network for all road users
Partnership Commitment: Strong – high level of support from police, NHS and
Districts, as well as Safety Camera Partnership. Some partnership funding available for
some schemes – potential for future road safety funding from SCP
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – programme of schemes
implemented on a County-wide basis
Strong
Strong
Sub-
Regional
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County Councillors for investment in road Strong HIGH
safety measures
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – direct impact on BVPI’s relating to casualty reduction Strong HIGH
Funding
LTP2: High Level – will require significant investment to have the necessary impact
(15% of budget proposed in line with public consultation in addition to the supplementary
road safety guideline to be announced by Government)
Partnership: Potential – funding from partners such as the police and Safety Camera
Partnership – especially on revenue activity (road safety training etc.)
Developer: Potential – potential for developer funding to tackle cluster sites where
development traffic will potentially add to existing safety problems
Other: Potential – Road Safety Planning Guideline – to be announced by Government –
priority to continuing funding for the Safety Camera Partnership

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT AREAS
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – tackling AQMA’s will support market towns initiative in Bewdley
and regeneration of Kidderminster
Social: Strong – tackling air quality problems will help improve social conditions in local
areas affected
Spatial Planning: Limited – tackling air quality problems may remove one constraint to
development in local areas affected
Housing: Limited – tackling air quality problems may allow residential development to
take place by removing a constraint.
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Strong – removing AQMA status
from identified problem sites will assist with the reduction of vehicle emissions
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Slight – measures could result in safer road layouts in AQMA
areas
Better Environment: Strong – schemes will tackle AQMA problems within the County,
thereby contributing to meeting environmental targets relating to clean air and climate
change
Economic success: Slight – minimal impact upon the local economy
Improved Health: Strong – removal of AQMA status should give health benefits for
local communities, particularly in relation to respiratory disease
Young People: Slight – little specific impact on younger people
Stronger communities: Moderate – schemes will help support local communities
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: Strong - Modelling has indicated
effectiveness of identified solutions to Air quality problems at 2 of the 3 AQMA’s. Further
work required on the third AQMA.
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives through the improvement of air quality
at identified problem areas
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate – schemes identified for 2 of the 3 AQMAs,
although consensus may still be a problem. Third site – solution still to be identified.
Risk Assessment: Moderate – some potential problems in achieving consensus on
appropriate solutions – especially at Bewdley and Bromsgrove AQMA sites. Potential
development may affect identified solution at Kidderminster
Individual
Score
Low
High
Low
Low
High
Individual
Score
Low
High
Low
High
Low
Medium
Individual
Score
High
High
Medium
Medium
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
HIGH
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
47% MEDIUM
- Air Quality (2%): Strong – programme intended to tackle existing AQMAs
(2%)
- Accessibility (47%): Moderate – measures will lead to some improvement in
accessibility within Bewdley town centre, and at Kidderminster by providing
better pedestrian / cycle routes across the ring road (25%)

- Congestion (30%): Moderate – identified measures will help reduce
congestion at localised areas affected by the AQMA designation (15%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – measures will allow some safety improvements
especially through providing better facilities for vulnerable road users (5%)
- Asset Management (6%): No impact – no impact anticipated on transport
asset management (0%)
- Linkages between Projects: Strong – links to Market Towns Initiative,
Sustainable Travel Initiatives, Road Safety strategy and Project Express
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Strong – statutory responsibility to work with District Councils to
address declared Air Quality Management Areas where these have arisen from traffic
emissions
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from District Councils (Wyre Forest and
Bromsgrove), although Highways Agency yet to fully engage on Bromsgrove site
(although HA response to LTP2 pledges that support will be forthcoming)
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Local – impact of schemes is very much at
a local level
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County and District Councillors in the
affected areas
CPA Core Indicators: Moderate – LTP2 Mandatory targets relate to improving air
quality in AQMA;s
Funding
LTP2: Medium Level – Bewdley package estimated at £110K, Kidderminster at £500K+
Bromsgrove not yet determined
Partnership: Potential – possible funding from Districts – most likely for monitoring
work. Bromsgrove – potential match funding from Highways Agency
Developer: Potential – potential for developer funding to match fund the Kidderminster
measures.
Other: Limited – no other funding sources identified
Strong
Strong
Local
Strong
Moderate
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: MINOR SCHEMES
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – schemes unlikely to support RSS Economic Strategy
Social: Strong – programme is intended to fund local schemes which benefit local
communities by meeting their needs
Spatial Planning: Limited – schemes unlikely to be of significance in spatial planning
terms
Housing: Limited – schemes unlikely to have impact on housing strategies
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Limited – schemes unlikely to
have significant impact on congestion – at best on a very local level
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Moderate – some schemes might improve road safety at a local
level
Better Environment: Moderate – some schemes might improve the local
environment through minor measures
Economic success: Slight – minor schemes are unlikely to have any significant
economic benefits
Improved Health: Moderate – some schemes might have some benefits through
minor local improvements to promote walking or cycling
Young People: Slight – schemes unlikely to have significant impact on younger
people
Stronger communities: Moderate – these schemes will be identified at a local level
and will therefore support stronger communities through local input
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: Limited – intention of programme is to
allow schemes that do not meet other strategy objectives to a high enough level to
proceed.
Environment: Moderate - supports SEA objectives by tackling local problems,
although at expense of other strategies
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate – programme of smaller schemes should be
reasonably deliverable, but individual schemes may have difficulty achieving
consensus
Risk Assessment: Low – scale of funding and size of likely programme means that
sufficient schemes always likely to ensure full spend achieved
Individual
Score
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
Low
Medium
Individual
Score
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
Final
Band
36% LOW
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – unlikely to address air quality issues (0%)
- Accessibility (47%): Moderate – some schemes likely to result in local
improvements in accessibility (20%)
- Congestion (30%): Limited – schemes unlikely to tackle significant
congestion hotspots – some local improvements may result (5%)

- Safety (15%): Moderate – schemes are likely to tackle perceived safety
problems rather than identified problems (5%)
- Asset Management (6%): Strong – many schemes likely to be based on
asset management issues – linked to maintenance works? (6%)
- Linkages between Projects : Limited – may link to Sustainable Travel
Initiatives or Project Express
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: None – desire from Members to see some lower priority areas
targeted
Partnership Commitment: Moderate - some support from District Councils and
support from Members
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Local – schemes likely to tackle local
issues only
Political Commitment: Strong – support from County Councillors for promotion of
local schemes
CPA Core Indicators: Slight – no significant impact on BVPI’s or LTP2 mandatory
indicators
Funding
LTP2: Low Level – relatively low allocation proposed throughout LTP2 period (£50K
per year)
Partnership: Potential – match funding from other bodies such as Parish Councils
expected for individual schemes
Developer: Potential – potential for developer funding to support local schemes
Other: Potential – potential funding from other sources such as LAA, Countryside
Agency etc for local schemes
Low
Medium
Local
Strong
Slight
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
LOW

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: STREET CLUTTER
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – potential link to Market Towns enhancement through
minimising street clutter
Social: Limited – no specific social considerations
Spatial Planning: Limited – slight link to Local Plan aspirations to improve town
centre environments through minimising street clutter
Housing: Limited – no specific impact
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Limited – no specific impact on
vehicle emissions
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Slight – no significant impact on safer communities
Better Environment: Strong –main objective of programme is to reduce the
environmental impact of street signs, markings and furniture
Economic success: Slight – no specific impact on the economy
Improved Health: Slight – no specific health benefits anticipated
Young People: Slight – no specific angle for younger people
Stronger communities: Slight – no specific impact on stronger communities
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence – some information
from pilot projects regarding potential impact on vehicle speeds by removing markings
/ signing
Environment: Strong - Supports SEA objectives through minimising the impact of
roadside infrastructure upon the environment
Deliverability Assessment: Moderate – main barrier would be getting a scheme
accepted through a safety audit
Risk Assessment: Moderate – main risks are associated with safety audit process,
and gaining widespread community acceptance
Individual
Score
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
Low
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
No Clear
Evidence
High
Medium
Medium
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
MEDIUM
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – no impact on AQMAs (0%)
Final
Band
11% VERY
LOW
- Accessibility (47%): Limited – no specific impact on accessibility (0%)
- Congestion (30%): Limited – no specific impact on congestion (0%)
- Safety (15%): Moderate – potential impact on safety through altering driver
behaviour (5%)
- Asset Management (6%): Strong – significant impact on Asset Management
Plan and processes (6%)
- Linkages between Projects : Moderate - Links to Market Towns Initiative

and Asset Management
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: Limited – CPRE lobbying to reduce impact of street signings,
furniture and markings on local environment.
Partnership Commitment: Strong - support from District Councils (especially
Wychavon – willing to have a joint project) and from CPRE / AONBs
Low
Strong
LOW
HIGH
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Local – likely to be local pilot schemes Local LOW
Political Commitment: Moderate – no significant support from Councillors, although
some interest from Districts and AONB Boards
CPA Core Indicators: Slight – no specific impact on BVPI or LTP2 Mandatory
Indicators
Funding
LTP2: Low Level – small amount of funding identified for two pilot projects (

NAME OF PROPOSED INTERVENTION: MONITORING STRATEGY
QUALITATIVE COMMENTS
BAND ASSESSMENT
Contribution to Regional Spatial Strategy:
Economic: Limited – ensuring information available to support future development
of LTP policies
Social: Limited – no specific impact
Spatial Planning: Limited – ensures information available to support future Local
Development Frameworks
Housing: Limited – no specific impact
Environment – reduction to Greenhouse Gases: Limited – no specific impact
Contribution to Local Area Agreement:
Safe Communities: Slight – no specific impact
Better Environment: Slight –no specific impact
Economic success: Slight – no specific impact
Improved Health: Slight – no specific impact
Young People: Low – no specific impact
Stronger communities: Low– no specific impact
Efficiency Assessment:
BCR or Evidence Base for Effectiveness: No clear evidence – but require data to
underpin other study work and justification of policies
Environment: Limited – no specific impact
Individual
Score
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Individual
Score
No clear
evidence
Low
Overall
Score
LOW
Overall
Score
LOW
Deliverability Assessment: Strong – insufficient funding at present to meet
High
Overall
identified needs for adequate monitoring strategy
Score
Risk Assessment: Low – no anticipated problems in achieving spend High HIGH
Overall Individual Assessment (incl. supporting information):
Contribution to Shared Priorities:
- Air Quality (2%): Limited – no specific impact (0%)
Final Band
0% VERY
LOW
- Accessibility (47%): Limited – no specific impact (0%)
- Congestion (30%): Limited – no specific impact (0%)
- Safety (15%): Limited – no specific impact (0%)
- Asset Management (6%): Limited – no specific impact (0%)
- Linkages between Projects : Strong – provides information to underpin
entire LTP2 programme
Political and Partnership Impact
Statutory Function: None – but data collection and monitoring needed to justify
LTP2 strategy
Low
LOW
Partnership Commitment: Limited – no specific partnership arrangements Low LOW
Regional/Sub-Regional or Local Scheme : Sub-regional – data requirement Sub-Regional MEDIUM

applies County-wide
Political Commitment: Slight – no specific views on monitoring Slight LOW
CPA Core Indicators: Strong – without adequate investment in monitoring, good Strong HIGH
reporting of LTP2 Mandatory Indicators could be more difficult
Funding
LTP2: Low Level – low level of investment required in monitoring equipment etc.
Partnership: Limited – no specific other funding sources identified to date
Developer: Potential – new monitoring equipment pursued as part of development
proposals as and when opportunities arise
Other: Limited – no specific funding identified to date

APPENDIX FIVE – FINANCE FORMS

FINAL SECOND LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN
LTP-F11: Summary of support sought from
local transport capital settlement
Plan: Worcestershire County Council
Contact Name: John Seddon
Telephone Number: 01905 766793
All figures in
£000
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Maintenance block expenditure (up to provisional 7993 8392 8812 9252
planning guidelines)
Primary route bridges and emergency works 0 n/a n/a n/a
Individual major schemes 0 0 0 0
Exceptional maintenance schemes each costing less
0 0 0 0
than £5 million
Integrated transport block expenditure (up to final 4399 4845 5325 5842
planning guidelines)
Further integrated transport block expenditure (up to
0 0 0 0
25% of final planning guidelines)
Total (local transport capital settlement) 12392 13237 14137 15094

Notes:
For LTP-F11 and F12
1. All entries should be in cash terms (assuming 2.5% pa
retail price inflation)
2. Enter all financial data in multiples of £1000, e.g. 500
= £500,000. DO NOT use commas or decimal places.
3. All expenditure entries should be for the funding
sought from the local transport capital settlement only.
4. The threshold for major schemes is for the gross cost
(not necessarily the local transport capital settlement
contribution) and is usually £5m, but is less for some
smaller authorities.
5. Maintenance schemes costing more than £5m should
be reported as major schemes.
For LTP-F11
1. The sum of the maintenance block and integrated
transport block expenditure (and not necessarily each
block) rows should sum to the final planning guidelines for
each year.
2. Funding profiles for primary route bridges and
emergency works after 2007/08 are not needed (but can
be included).
For LTP-F12
1. Only schemes for which support is sought during the
2007/08 to 2010/11 period should be included.
2. Schemes should be listed as either a major,
exceptional or supplementary scheme, with their F2 code.

FINAL
SECOND
LOCAL
TRANSPORT
PLAN
LTP-F12:
Summary of
support from
local
transport
capital
settlement
for major
schemes
and
exceptional
schemes
Plan:
Worcestershire
County Council
Authority
No.
221
All
figures
in £000
Scheme name DfT Start
of
End
of
Type Ref/ main main 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
works works
Pry mm yyyy mm yyyy and
before
and
after
TOTAL LTP-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F12 - ALL
TOTAL LTP-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
F12 - MAJOR
SCHEMES
TOTAL LTP-
F12 -
EXCEPTIONAL
MAINTENANCE
SCHEMES
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

APPENDIX SIX – MONITORING STRATEGY

Mandatory LTP indicators – Best Value
• Principal road condition (BVPI 223)
• Non-principal classified road condition (BVPI 224a)
• Unclassified road condition (BVPI 224b)
• Total killed and seriously injured casualties (BVPI 99a)
• Child killed and seriously injured casualties (BVPI 99b)
• Total slight casualties (BVPI 99c)
• Public transport patronage (BVPI 102)
• Satisfaction with local bus services (BVPI 104)
• Footway condition (BVPI 187)

Indicator Principal road condition (BVPI 223)
Methodology
As from 2005 BVPI 223 will be derived from SCANNER surveys
of the entire Principal road network in one direction only, carried
out in accordance with the specification detailed in Volume 2 of
the UK Roads Board publication ‘SCANNER Surveys for Local
Roads’. The new SCANNER Road Condition Indicator will give
the percentage of the network in the red zone.
Relationship
BVPI 224a&b, BVPI 187, WCC 5a&b
Baseline Year 2005/06
Baseline Data 3%
At the time of publication it is not possible to report the final
SCANNER Road Condition Indicator value, therefore the figure
published is only an estimated figure yet to be ratified
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
4%/3%
Satisfactory/Stretched Due to the evolving nature of the indicator and limited historical
data, the targets are merely indicative and will require further
refinement as and when additional survey information is
accumulated over time.
Trajectory
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
7.0
6.4 5.8 5.2 4.6 4.0
Actual
BVPI 223
Value
Projected
BVPI 223
value
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Optimise the targeting of maintenance works to achieve
appropriate levels of service
Provide cost effective engineering solutions in order to maximise
carriageway serviceability
Reduction in maintenance budgets
Due to the lack of substantial historical TTS/SCANNER data and
the rather fluid and evolving nature of the new SCANNER Road
Condition Indicator, the County Council feel that performance
monitoring at a local level should continue to be based on CVI
survey data (see WCC 5a). CVI surveys have been carried out by
an in-house inspection team since 1998. Following a survey of the
entire County road network between 1998 and 1999, the County
Council has adopted a survey strategy which entails annual
surveys of all A, B and C class roads and 50% of the unclassified
network. Based on current network lengths this equates to an
average annual inspection length of 2942km out of a possible
total of 3958km.
Up to the year ending March 2006 the total aggregate length of
road surveyed amounts to 21,300 carriageway km. By
comparison TTS/SCANNER coverage is limited to the following
lengths:
Principal
Survey Lane/kms C’way/kms
Year
2004/05 822 475
Roads 2005/06 475 *
* Roads surveyed in one direction only

Indicator Non-principal classified road condition (BVPI 224a)
Methodology
As from 2005 BVPI 224a will be derived from SCANNER surveys
of (in one direction only) all B class roads and 10% of the C class
roads, carried out in accordance with the specification detailed in
Volume 2 of the UK Roads Board publication ‘SCANNER Surveys
for Local Roads’. The new SCANNER Road Condition Indicator
will give the percentage of the network in the red zone.
Relationship
BVPI 223, BVPI 224b, BVPI 187, WCC 5a&b
Baseline Year 2005/06
Baseline Data 23%
At the time of publication it is not possible to report the final
SCANNER Road Condition Indicator value, therefore the figure
published is only an estimated figure yet to be ratified
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
Satisfactory/Stretched
17%/16%
Due to the evolving nature of the indicator and limited historical
data, the targets are merely indicative and will require further
refinement as and when additional survey information is
accumulated over time
Trajectory
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Actual BVPI 224a
15.0
Value
20.0
25.0
30.0
23.0
21.8
20.6
19.4
18.2
17.0
Projected BVPI 224a
Value
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Optimise the targeting of maintenance works to achieve
appropriate levels of service
Provide cost effective engineering solutions in order to maximise
carriageway serviceability
Reduction in maintenance budgets
Due to the lack of substantial historical TTS/SCANNER data and
the rather fluid and evolving nature of the new SCANNER Road
Condition Indicator, the County Council feel that performance
monitoring at a local level should continue to be based on CVI
survey data (see WCC 5a). CVI surveys have been carried out by
an in-house inspection team since 1998. Following a survey of the
entire County road network between 1998 and 1999, the County
Council has adopted a survey strategy which entails annual
surveys of all A, B and C class roads and 50% of the unclassified
network. Based on current network lengths this equates to an
average annual inspection length of 2942km out of a possible
total of 3958km.
Up to the year ending March 2006 the total aggregate length of
road surveyed amounts to 21,300 carriageway km. By
comparison TTS/SCANNER coverage is limited to the following
lengths:
B Roads
C Roads
Survey Lane/kms C’way/kms
Year
2004/05 0 0
2005/06 387 *
2004/05 0 0
2005/06 113 *
* Roads surveyed in one direction only

Indicator Unclassified road condition (BVPI 224b)
Methodology
Percentage length of the Unclassified Road Network that
has exceeded the point at which surface or structural repair
of the carriageway should be considered based on the
length of road meeting any of the following criteria:
• Structural Condition Index >= 85
• Wearing Course Condition Index >= 60
• Edge Condition Index >= 50
Relationship
BVPI 223, BVPI 224a, BVPI 187, LTP 5 a&b
Baseline Year 2004/2005
Baseline Data 20.3
Target Year 2008/2009
Target Data
20.3/19.5
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
New Survey
5
10
15
20
25
30
15.91
19.80 18.13 17.04 20.33 21.10 20.90 20.60 20.30
BVPI 97b var length
target
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Optimise the targeting of maintenance works to achieve
appropriate levels of service
Provide cost effective engineering solutions in order to
maximise carriageway serviceability
Reduction in maintenance budgets
Collated in accordance with Audit Commission guidance for
BVPI, utilising UKPMS automatic pass results of CVI survey
data collected in accordance with the guidance set out in
“UKPMS user manual – Volume 2 Visual data collection for
UKPMS”

Indicator Total killed and seriously injured casualties (BVPI 99a)
Methodology
Collated in accordance with Audit Commission guidance for
BVPI using STATS 19 police accident data
Relationship
BVPI 99b, BVPI 99c
Baseline Year 1994-1998 (2001-2004 LTP2 stretched)
Baseline Data 548 (304)
Target Year 2010
Target Data
283/255
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Killed and Seriously Injured
600
500
400
300
200
100
-
Minimum Standard
Stretched
1994-98
2001-04
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Actions-WCC
• Delivery of Road Safety Strategy
Actions-partners • Police – Enforcement of Traffic Regulations
• Schools – Continued support for road safety education
and training
• Other Local Authorities – Safety Camera Partnership
Risks • Reduction in resources both locally and nationally
• Weakening of partnership links
Comments
Investment in Road Safety Education together with carefully
targeted casualty reduction measures delivered in
cooperation with the Police, Safety Camera Partnership and
Community Safety Partnership is likely to result in a
significant reduction in casualties.

Indicator Child killed and seriously injured casualties (BVPI 99b)
Methodology
Collated in accordance with Audit Commission guidance for
BVPI using STATS 19 police accident data (3 year floating
average)
Relationship
BVPI 99a, BVPI 99c
Baseline Year 1994-1998 (2001-2004 LTP2 stretched)
Baseline Data 59 (28 LTP2 stretched)
Target Year 2010
Target Data
28/22
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Children Killed and Seriously Injured
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
-
1994-98
2005
2007
2009
Minimum Standard
Stretched
Actions-WCC
• Delivery of Road Safety Strategy and training
Actions-partners • Police - Delivery of speed camera partnership
• Schools – Continued support for road safety education
and training
Risks • Reduction in resources both locally and nationally
• Weakening of partnership links
• Failure of 20mph zones adjacent to schools
Comments
Investment in Road Safety Education together with carefully
targeted casualty reduction measures delivered in
cooperation with the Police, Safety Camera Partnership and
Community Safety Partnership is likely to result in a
significant reduction in casualties. Uptake of school travel
plans, and reduced speed limits outside schools offer
additional support to proposed targets.

Indicator Total slight casualties (BVPI 99c)
Methodology
Collated in accordance with Audit Commission guidance for
BVPI using STATS 19 police accident data
Relationship
BVPI 99a, BVPI 99b
Baseline Year 1994-1998 (2001-2004 –LTP2 stretched)
Baseline Data 2177 (1996 – LTP2 stretched)
Target Year 2010
Target Data
1966 /1875
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Slight Casualties
2,200
2,100
2,000
Minimum Standard
1,900
Stretched
1,800
1,700
1994-98
2005
2007
2009
Actions-WCC
• Delivery of Road Safety Strategy
Actions-partners • Police - Delivery of speed camera partnership
• Schools – Continued support for road safety education
and training
Risks • Reduction in resources both locally and nationally
• Weakening of partnership links
Comments
Investment in Road Safety Education together with carefully
targeted casualty reduction measures delivered in
cooperation with the Police, Safety Camera Partnership and
Community Safety Partnership is likely to result in a
significant reduction in casualties.

Indicator Public transport patronage (BVPI 102)
Methodology
Carried out in accordance with Audit Commission guidance
for BVPI 102
Relationship BVPI 104, LTP1a, LTP5a, LTP5b, WCC 2a, WCC 2b,
WCC 3b, WCC 4a, WCC 4b, WCC 6, WCC 9
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 13,642,350
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
13.7 million /14.3 million
Bus Patronage
Thousand Passengers
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
Satisfactory
Stretched
2003/04
2005/06
2007/08
2009/10
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• Delivery of Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
• Delivery of ‘Park and Ride’ and ‘Project Express’ for
Worcester
• Implementation of countywide concessionary fares
scheme
• Delivery of sustainable travel town project
• Bus operators - to invest in local networks / active
participation in bus quality partnerships
• District and City Councils - investment in bus shelters and
parking policy
• Worcester Royal Hospital – travel plan and weekend park
and ride site
• University of Worcester – travel plan and park and ride
site
• Worcester Rugby Club – park and ride site
• Primary Care Trust – to continue support for essential
service to healthcare
• Employers – to promote travel plans for employees
• Lack of control over commercial operation of services
• Long term political acceptance of car demand restraint /
public transport priority in urban areas
• District car parking policies
Patronage forecasts based upon evidence of improvements
made to specific corridors during LTP1, and the strong
support for public transport enhancements in LTP2
programme (including park and ride and sustainable travel
town). Targets agreed by public transport delivery team
and local bus operators.

Indicator Satisfaction with local bus services (BVPI 104)
Methodology
Carried out in accordance with Audit Commission guidance
for BVPI 104 – random sample of face-to-face interviews
(2200 surveyed, 1102 respondents - baseline)
Relationship BVPI 102, LTP 1a, LTP 5a, LTP 5b, WCC 3b, WCC 4a,
WCC4b, WCC 6, WCC9
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 37%
Target Year 2009/2010
Target Data 41% /45%
Trajectory
Satisfaction with Bus Services
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Satisfactory
Stretched
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Surveys in 2006/07 and 2009/10
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• Delivery of Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
• Delivery of Project Express including Park and Ride
facilities for Worcester
• Delivery of sustainable travel town project
• Enhanced marketing and promotion
• Bus operators - to invest in local networks / active
participation in bus quality partnerships. Driver training
and customer care initiatives.
• District Councils – improvements to bus stops / shelters
and concessionary fares schemes.
• PCT – to continue support for essential service to
healthcare
• Lack of control over commercial operation of services
• Long term political acceptance of car demand restraint /
public transport priority in urban areas
Forecasts based upon evidence of improvements made to
specific corridors during LTP1, and the strong support for
public transport enhancements in LTP2 programme
(including park and ride and sustainable travel town).
Target level agreed by public transport delivery team and
local bus operators.

Indicator Footway condition (BVPI 187)
Methodology
Collated in accordance with Audit Commission guidance for
BVPI, utilising UKPMS automatic pass results of CVI survey
data (Visual Survey Manual July 2001 and subsequent
Technical Note 1 April 2002)
Relationship
BVPI 223, BVPI 224 a&b, WCC 5a&b
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 60.22
Target Year 2007/2008
Target Data
60/57
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Maintenance - Footway Condition
64
62
60
58
56
54
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actual
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Optimise the targeting of maintenance works to achieve
appropriate levels of service
Provide cost effective engineering solutions in order to
maximise carriageway serviceability
Reduction in maintenance budgets
(none)

Mandatory Indicators – LTP2
• Accessibility – percentage of working age population with access by
bus to a major employment site in 60 minutes (LTP 1a)
• Accessibility – Number of register users of Worcestershire car share
database (LTP 1b)
• Change in area-wide road traffic mileage (LTP 2)
• Cycling trips (LTP 3)
• Mode share of journeys to school (LTP 4) – data not available until 2007
• Bus punctuality – percentage of buses starting their route on time (LTP
5a)
• Bus punctuality – percentage of buses on time at intermediate points
(LTP 5b)
• NO 2 Levels at Air Quality Management Areas – AQMA (LTP 8)

Indicator
Methodology
Accessibility – Percentage of working age population
with access (by bus) to a major employment site in 60
minutes (8am to 9am) – LTP 1a
Use of Accession software to model percentage of working
age residents within 1 hour by bus to nearest major
employment site during the am peak
Relationship BVPI 102, BVPI 104, WCC2a&b, WCC 6, WCC 9
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 81%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
82% /83%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
Accessibility - Access to hospitals in 60 minutes
(13:00 to 14:00)
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC • Encourage employers to develop Employer Transport
Plans (ETPs)
• Focus new employment developments in accessible
locations
• Improve public transport links to employment sites
Actions-partners • Promote the county car sharing database (for e.g.
through JobCentrePlus), to provide access
opportunities at the point of interview
• Employers to actively promote and develop ETPs
• Employers to provide schemes that enable young
people to gain access to transport (e.g. wheels to work,
loans for travelcards, employee minibus etc)
Risks
Comments
Lack of commitment by employers
The existing accessibility profile is based around the
subsidy of conventional connecting services. The target
requires a more holistic approach to transport provision,
involving other forms of transport e.g. flexibus, taxibus,
employer bus services, rail. This will be delivered through
the accessibility strategy, and may involve more
personalised approach to transport provision that will be
incorporated within the reported indicator.

Indicator
Number of registered users of Worcestershire car share
database (LTP1b)
Methodology
To record the number of new users, and to undertake a
benchmarking exercise with individual employers on a 3
yearly basis that compares membership levels with actual
car share activity.
Relationship
WCC 2a, WCC 2b
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 574
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
3000/5000
Satisfactory/stretched
Trajectory
6,000
4,000
2,000
-
2004/05
Accessibility – Number of registered users of
Worcestershire car share database
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC • Implement effectively the County Hall Campus
Travel Plan
• Encourage employers throughout the county to
develop and implement an approved Travel Plan for
their sites
• Ensure approved Travel Plans are submitted by
developers as part of the development control and
planning process
• Ensure Travel Plans submitted by developers for
planning approval are adhered to.
Actions-partners • Employers combine encouraging car sharing with
restrictions on single occupancy car travel for work
purposes
• Chamber of Commerce – encourage employers to
embrace the Travel Plan concept and publicise the
countywide car share database
Risks • Approved Travel Plans are not effectively
implemented
• Travel Plans are not monitored
• Misuse of database
Comments
This indicator is closely linked to the number of Employer
Travel Plans as it is the commitment to an ETP that is often
the catalyst to an employer joining and promoting the car
share database

Indicator
Methodology
Change in area-wide road traffic mileage (LTP2)
Data produced from National Road Traffic Survey (reported
as indexed based on baseline year being set at 100)
Relationship BVPI 102, LTP3, LTP4, LTP8b, LTP8c, LTP8d, WCC 1,
WCC 2a, WCC 2b, WCC 3a, WCC 3b, WCC 6, WCC 7,
WCC 9, WCC 10
Baseline Year 2004/05
Baseline Data 100 (6584 million vehicle kilometres)
Target Year 2010/11
Target Data
117(7700 million vehicle kilometres) /100 – stretched
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Change in area-w ide road traffic mileage
120.00
110.00
100.00
90.00
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• Delivery of Public transport strategy
• Delivery of sustainable travel initiatives
• Delivery of Worcester Sustainable Towns Initiative
• Planning process to reduce need to travel for work,
education, retail and recreation
• Rail partners to deliver capacity improvements on national
rail network
• Bus operators to support delivery of public transport
strategy
• Schools and Employers to implement approved Travel
Plans
• Increased capacity on strategic highway network results in
greater demands for road traffic on local roads
• Lack of delivery of rail network improvements
The satisfactory target is based on the NRTS traffic growth
forecast for Worcestershire.

Indicator
Cycling trips annualised index (LTP3)
Methodology
Sample of 15 Automatic Cycle Counters across the County
recording Average Annual Daily Cycling Trips (reported as
an index figure)
Relationship LTP4, WCC1, WCC 2a, WCC 2b, WCC 6
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 100 (75 Average monthly daily total/7 day 24 hr)
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
100 /130
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Cycling Trips
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
LTP2
Stretched
Actual
Actions-WCC • Environmental Services (Delivery & Operations) -
delivery of Cycle Strategy / continual improvements
to existing cycle network/ promotion of school and
employer travel plans Environmental Services
(Development Control) – funding for cycle facilities
from planning gain
• Education – support for site specific travel plans
• Delivery of Sustainable Travel Town Project
Actions-partners • District Councils – development of local plan/ cycle
strategy
• Sustrans – planning/ land negotiation for National
Cycle Routes based on continuation of funding
arrangement
• Primary Care Trust – active delivery of site specific
travel plans, promoting/encouraging healthy lifestyle
choices including cycling
• Employers – adopt effective travel plan policies
Risks • Continued growth in car traffic makes cycling less
attractive for journeys to/from work
• Political – re-allocation of road space/ shared-use
paths
Comments
Target levels based upon national predictions for cycle use.
The 30% stretched target over the 5 years takes account of
progress made in LTP1, continued investment in both
infrastructure and promotion and the strong positive
statement made by the ERCDT in their cycle audit of the
County.

Indicator
Mode share of journeys to school (LTP4)
Methodology
Hands up survey of at least 50% of children across
Worcestershire in each category. Surveys undertaken in
October each year.
Relationship LTP3, WCC 1
Baseline Year 2006/07
Baseline Data
5-10 yr old 11-16 yr old
Car (incl.
van/taxi)
To be updated in 2006/07 interim
monitoring through WCC2
Car share
Public
transport
Walking
Cycling
Total 100% 100%
Total
sustainable
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Car (incl.
van/taxi)
Car share
Public
transport
Walking
Cycling
5-10 yr old 11-16 yr old
To be updated in 2006/07 interim
monitoring through WCC2
Total 100% 100%
Total
sustainable
To be updated in 2006/07 interim monitoring through WCC2
• Delivery of school travel strategy
• Delivery of walk, cycle and bus and information strategies
• Education Directorate – support for school travel
• DfT –school travel plan grant support
• Long term commitment to school plan travel grant support
• Staff resources - high early interest from schools results in
long time between initial interest and delivery.
Evidence from LTP1 indicates reduced reliance on private
car for schools with travel plan in place. Safer routes to
schools programme largely completed, with increased focus
on working with schools to increase both uptake and
effectiveness of school travel plans. National target for all
schools to have travel plan in place by 2010 likely o be
achieved in Worcestershire. Performance money would
enable pilot of yellow bus services to be launched, having
significant impact on car use.

Indicator
The percentage of buses starting their route on time
(LTP5a)
Methodology
On bus surveys carried out on a sample of routes over a
week long period
Relationship BVPI 102, BVPI 104, LTP 2, LTP5a, WCC 3b , WCC 4b,
WCC 6, WCC 9
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 93.6%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
93.6%/96%
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
93%
92%
91%
2003/04
Bus punctuality – Percentage of buses starting
their route on time
2005/06
2007/08
2009/10
2011/12
2013/14
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• To convene the Bus Punctuality Improvement Partnership
• Deliver the Public transport strategy
• Bus Operators – to be actively involved in the Bus
Punctuality Improvement Partnership
• Lack of control over commercial bus operators
Improved relationships with bus operator during later stages
of LTP1, combined with strengthened bus quality
partnership suggest strong opportunity to improve
punctuality of service. Investment in the public transport
strategy will improve reliability, and measures to tackle
congestion in urban areas will ensure easier and more
reliable access for buses.

Indicator
The percentage of buses on time at intermediate timing
points (LTP5b)
Methodology
On bus surveys carried out on a sample of routes over a
week long period
Relationship BVPI 102, BVPI 104, LTP 2, LTP5a, WCC 3b, WCC 4b,
WCC 6, WCC 9
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 75.9%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
79%/85%
Satisfactory/stretched
Trajectory
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
2003/04
Bus punctuality – Percentage of buses on time
at non-timing points
2005/06
2007/08
2009/10
2011/12
2013/14
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• To convene the Bus Punctuality Improvement Partnership
• Deliver the Public transport strategy
• Bus Operators – to be actively involved in the Bus
Punctuality Improvement Partnership
• Lack of control over commercial bus operators
Improved relationships with bus operator during later stages
of LTP1, combined with strengthened bus quality
partnership suggest strong opportunity to improve
punctuality of service. Investment in the public transport
strategy will improve reliability, and measures to tackle
congestion in urban areas will ensure easier and more
reliable access for buses.

Indicator Pollution levels at AQMA sites (LTP8)
Methodology Annual NO 2 levels µg/m 3 at AQMA’s
Relationship LTP 2
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data Welchgate(Bewdley) – 55.66
Horsefair (Kidderminster) – 61.79
Junction1 M42 – 47.7
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data All sites – 40
Trajectory
NO2 levels mg/m3 at AQMA’s
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Welchgate
Horsefair
Junction 1 M42
• Agree appropriate strategy solutions for each AQMA
• Seek funding for delivery
• Deliver and monitor package of improvement measures
• Highways agency to deliver speed management on M42
• District Councils – monitoring of air quality and agreement to
package of improvement measures
• Modelled solutions do not deliver expected gains
• Lack of control over measures on M42 to alleviate Bromsgrove
AQMA
• Traffic growth / congestion results in more AQMA’s declared
during LTP2 period
Target to reduce number of declared AQMA’s will have a direct
influence on air quality at particular sensitive locations, hence
whilst an output indicator, provides a good measure for air quality
improvements. Indicator also assess the aim to ensure no new
air quality management areas are declared during LTP2.

Local Indicators
• Condition of Principal roads based on BVPI 96 CVI surveys (WCC 5a)
• Condition of Non - Principal roads based on BVPI 96 CVI surveys (WCC
5b)
• Percentage of Worcester journeys made by walk, cycle and bus
combined (WCC6)
• Congestion – peak journey times (WCC 7)
• Ease of use of rights of way (WCC 8)
• Satisfaction with public transport information all users (WCC 9)
• Carbon Dioxide emissions from traffic (WCC 10)

Indicator
Methodology
Condition of Principal roads based on BVPI 96 CVI
surveys (WCC5a)
Percentage Length of Principal Road Network where
Strengthening should be considered, based on the length of
road meeting the following criteria :-
• Structural Condition Index >= 70
Relationship BVPI 223
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 7.58
Target Year 2008/09
Target Data
5.97
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
BVPI value
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Condition of Principal roads based on BVPI 96 (CVI)
year
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
10.2 7.4 5.2 3.4 5.64 7.58 7.17 6.77 6.37 5.97
New Survey
Road Condition
Deteriorating
BVPI 96 var length
target
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Optimise the targeting of maintenance works to achieve
appropriate levels of service
Provide cost effective engineering solutions in order to
maximise carriageway serviceability
Reduction in maintenance budgets
CVI surveys to be continued alongside SCANNER surveys
see BVPI 223 for more details

Indicator
Condition of non - principal classified roads based on
BVPI 97a CVI surveys (WCC5b)
Methodology
Percentage Length of the Non-Principal Classified Road
Network that has exceeded the point at which surface or
structural repair of the carriageway should be considered,
based on the length of road meeting any of the following 3
criteria:
• Structural Condition Index >= 85
• Wearing Course Condition Index >= 60
• Edge Condition Index >= 50
Relationship
BVPI 224a
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 34%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
34% / 41%
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
20.10 19.55 20.71
26.25
BVPI 97a var length
21.35 21.71 21.31 20.91 20.51
target
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Optimise the targeting of maintenance works to achieve
appropriate levels of service
Provide cost effective engineering solutions in order to
maximise carriageway serviceability
Reduction in maintenance budgets
CVI surveys to be continued alongside SCANNER surveys
see BVPI 224 for more details

Indicator
Percentage of Worcester journeys made by walk, cycle
and bus, combined (WCC 6)
Methodology
Determined through a travel behaviour survey sample of
4,125 residents of Worcester
Relationship BVPI 102,104, LTP 1a, LTP 3, 5a&b, WCC 3b,
Baseline Year 2004/2005
Baseline Data 34%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
34% / 41%
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Percentage of Worcester journeys in the peak
hour made by walk, cycle and bus (combined)
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
• Promote personalised Travel Planning for Worcester
households
• Improve highway infrastructure to provide a more
attractive journey foot, by bicycle and on the bus
• Promote the health, environmental and financial benefits
of leaving the car at home
• Advise and provide support to schools and employers
developing Travel Plans
• Schools and Employers – develop Travel Plans
• University of Worcester and South West Primary Care
Trust – promotion of the benefits of choosing not to drive
for all journeys
• Darlington and Peterborough Sustainable Travel Towns
project teams – share best practice
• Bus operators cut routes and services into the city
• City centre car parking policy (provision and charges) fails
to support the project by providing sufficient demand
restraint on car travel into the city
(none)

Indicator
Methodology
Relationship
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data
Congestion - peak journey times on the county’s
congestion hot spots (WCC 7)
Average journey times taken during peak hour
LTP2, WCC6, WCC3b
am peak
(minutes)
A4440 westbound 19 20.5
A4440 eastbound 26 17.5
Between Stourport 10.5 9.5
Bridge and
Resolution Way
pm peak
(minutes)
Target Year A4440 - 2010/2011; Stourport – 2008/09
Target Data
Satisfactory/Stretched
am peak
(minutes)
pm peak
(minutes)
A4440 westbound 19/17 20.5/18.5
A4440 eastbound 26/23.5 17.5/15.5
Between Stourport
Bridge and
Resolution Way
11/9.5 10/8.5
Trajectory
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Monitoring of journey times will be carried out once all
disruptions due to the road works has subsided and normal
traffic flows have resumed. Thus for the A4440 after
monitoring will not be possible until the end of the plan
period in 2011. The after monitoring for Stourport is
expected to be 2008/09. There are no trajectories shown as
due to the traffic disruption when road works are being
carried journey times during the period will be very erratic
• Develop and implement traffic management measures to
alleviate congestion
• Contractors – carry out improvement works with the
minimum disruption
• Further increases in traffic levels at these sites due to
repressed demand could outweigh the benefits of the
improvements made
(none)

Indicator Ease of use of rights of way (WCC 8)
Methodology
Relationship
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 54%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
The percentage of total length of footpaths and other rights
of way which were easy to use by members of the public
65% / 67%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
Satisfactory
Stretched
45%
40%
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
• Parish Improvement Programme will ensure that each
parish in the County is surveyed and some
improvements made at least once every five years
• Improvements to signing and waymarking
Actions-partners • Parish and Town Councils, Volunteer Organisations
and Community Groups - These groups and individuals
help to deliver improvements to the rights of way
network at a local level through Parish Paths Warden
volunteer scheme and the Parish Paths Partnership
grant scheme
• District Councils, Countryside Agency, Environment
Agency and DEFRA may work with us on appropriate
projects, which contribute to improvements to the
network.
• Landowners - compliance with ploughing and cropping
legislation
Risks • Reduction in budget
• Restrictions to countryside due to epidemics etc e.g.
Avian Influenza.
Comments
(none)

Indicator
Satisfaction with public transport information - all users
(WCC 9)
Methodology
BVPI 103 Triennual Survey – Percentage of all respondents
satisfied with local provision of public transport information
(2200 surveyed, 1102 respondents - baseline)
Relationship BVPI 102, BVPI 104, LTP 1a, LTP 5a, LTP 5b, WCC 3b,
WCC 4a, WCC4b, WCC 6, WCC
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 24%
Target Year 2009/2010
Target Data
39%/43%
Satisfactory/stretched
Trajectory
Percentage satisfied with public transport
information
50%
40%
30%
satisfactory
20%
Stretched
10%
0%
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
Actions-WCC • Delivery of Integrated Passenger Transport Strategy
• Delivery of Project Express including Park and Ride
facilities for Worcester
• Delivery of sustainable travel town project
• Enhanced marketing and promotion
• Promotion and marketing of public transport
information in an user friendly format and made easily
available
Actions-partners • Bus operators - to invest in local networks / active
participation in bus quality partnerships. Provide clock
face services where possible and limit timetable changes
• District Councils – improvements to bus stops / shelters
and concessionary fares schemes.
• PCT – to continue support for essential service to
healthcare
Risks
• Lack of control over commercial operation of services.
Operators changing timetables, removing services and
not operating on time
Comments Future surveys scheduled for 2006/07 and 2009/10

Indicator CO 2 emissions (WCC 10)
Methodology
Estimated tonnes of CO 2 emitted by road transport based
on a multiplication factor of 0.35 on road mileage
Relationship
LTP2
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 1.432 million tonnes
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
1.432 million tonnes/1.380 million tonnes
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Traffic (million
tonnes per year)
1.44
1.42
1.4
1.38
1.36
1.34
satisfactory
stretched
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• Encourage the reduction of car travel in favour of more
sustainable travel means
• Reduce the need to travel
• Where appropriate use biofuels in own fleet vehicles and
promote the use of such fuel by other organisations
• Schools & Employers – develop and implement Travel
Plans
• Companies – use biofuels for fleet vehicles
• Car travel continues to rise
• District parking policies do not support restraint on car
travel
The stretched target for this indicator is from the County
Councils Climate Change Strategy and based on reducing
traffic mileage CO 2 levels to 2001 levels by 2010

Regional Indicators
• Number of school travel plans (WCC 1)
• Number of employers that have adopted a travel plan (WCC 2a)
• Proportion of the workforce that work in organisations that have
adopted a travel plan (WCC 2b)
• Number of car parking spaces at railway stations (WCC 3a)
• Park and ride for town centre spaces (WCC 3b)
• Accessibility – Percentage of population with access by bus to a major
healthcare centre within 60 minutes (WCC4a)
• Accessibility – Number of buses that are low floor (WCC 4b)

Indicator Number of school travel plans (WCC 1)
Methodology
To record number of new school travel plans adopted and
approved each year
Relationship
LTP4, WCC 2a
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 86
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data 298
Trajectory
Number of school travel plans
300
250
200
150
100
50
-
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
• Environmental Services – school travel planning support
and promotion
• Education – active engagement with hard to reach
schools
• Schools – to embrace and support the concept of school
travel plans
• Lack of long term funding support through DfT Action Plan
(mitigation: to offer local grant support through challenge
funding)
A strong team of school travel plan advisors is making good
progress, and through the support of the critical mass of
schools it is envisaged that the hard to reach schools will
produce school travel plans during the LTP2 period.

Indicator
Number of employers that have adopted a travel plan
(WCC 2a)
Methodology
To record number of new employer travel plans adopted
and approved each year
Relationship
WCC 1, LTP1b
Baseline Year 2004/2005
Baseline Data 30
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
60/100
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Number of employers that have adopted a
travel plan
100
80
60
40
20
-
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• Environmental Services – promoting and supporting travel
plan activity across the County
• Economic development – to continue to support the
concept of travel plans, for example through the
Worcestershire Partnership
• Employers and developers– adopting Travel Plans
• Chamber of Commerce – promoting Travel Plans
• Lack of County Council resources to provide adequate
support to a large number of employers developing Travel
Plans and monitoring adopted Travel Plans
• During the early stages of the LTP2 period the more
enthusiastic employers commit to Travel Plans and the
momentum is difficult to maintain in later years
Travel Plans adopted by larger employers more greatly
affect Indicator WCC 3b whereas joint plans between a
number of employers at a single site e.g. industrial estate
more greatly affect indicator 3a

Indicator
Proportion of the workforce that work in organisations
that have committed to a travel plan (WCC 2b)
Methodology
To record number of employees covered by employer travel
plans, and assess compared to total active workforce for the
County as a whole
Relationship
LTP 1b, WCC 2a
Baseline Year 2004/2005
Baseline Data 5%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
20% /30%
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Proportion of the workforce that work in organisations
that have commited to a travel plan
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Satisfactory
Stretched
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
• Environmental Services – promoting and supporting travel
plan activity across the County
• Economic development – to continue to support the
concept of travel plans, for example through the
Worcestershire Partnership
• Employers and developers– adopting Travel Plans
• Chamber of Commerce – promoting Travel Plans
• Lack of County Council resources to provide adequate
support to a large number of employers developing Travel
Plans and monitoring adopted Travel Plans
• During the early stages of the LTP2 period the more
enthusiastic employers commit to Travel Plans and the
momentum is difficult to maintain in later years
As larger employers are targeted first it is expected that
there will be a steeper increase earlier in the plan period
levelling off later in the plan period

Indicator
Number of car parking spaces at railway stations (WCC
3a)
Methodology
Total car parking spaces dedicated to rail passengers at
each rail station in the County
Relationship
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 1171
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
1561/1757
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2003/04
2004/05
Number of car parking spaces at railway
stations
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
Actions-WCC • The County Council will endeavour to work with the train
operating companies and with district councils to identify
opportunities to expand car parking at rail stations in the
County. Opportunities include Bromsgrove, Malvern
Link and Wythall.
• The bidding process for the Cross Country and West
Midlands franchises will be critical and the County
Council will aim to have schemes in place, which the
bidders can take forward in their bids to run the
franchises.
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
Rail Industry and District Councils - The County Council’s
partners will need to identify sites for car parks through the
development of local planning documents and will need to
identify funding streams to ensure that delivery of the car
park schemes materialise.
Identification of available land at a reasonable cost will be
the premium risk. Demand for car parking could be affected
by the future development of the train service in
Worcestershire, e.g. if a half hourly frequency train service
at Wythall is not pursued then demand for car parking would
not be as strong. The parallel development of schemes in
neighbouring authorities can affect demand for parking at
stations in Worcestershire. For example demand for car
parking at Kidderminster has fallen since the large car park
extension at Stourbridge Junction opened.
Demand for rail travel continues to increase and new train
franchises covering the County have just been let, or will be
let in 2007. These new franchises are required to grow their
revenue substantially, so will be looking for more parking
spaces at the stations they manage to cope with the
increase in demand they will hope to generate

Indicator Park and ride for town centre spaces (WCC 3b)
Methodology
Total number of permanent park and ride spaces in the
county
Relationship BVPI 102 &104, LTP 1a, LTP 5a&b, WCC 4a&b, WCC 6
Baseline Year 2003/2004
Baseline Data 450
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
1050 /1950
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Park and ride for town centre spaces
Actions-WCC
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
Establish two further Park and Ride facilities for Worcester
firstly at M5 junction 6 and secondly to serve the south east
of the city and M5 junction 7.
Actions-partners • Worcester Rugby club , Worcestershire Royal Hospital,
Shire Business Park, University and Rail Companies
working in partnership with WCC to provide interchange
facilities for the Project Express initiative
• District Councils – planning approval for Park and Ride
sites within their District area
Risks • Problems with land acquisition and planning approval
could delay implementation.
• Lack of resources
Comments
It is proposed that there be three permanent Park and Ride
Transport Interchange facilities by the end of the LTP2
period (Included in indicator). However, it is also proposed
that there will be up to three part time Park and Ride
facilities at County Hall, Worcestershire Royal Hospital and
University ( not included in indicator).

Indicator
Methodology
Relationship BVPI 102 &104
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 65%
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data 84%
Trajectory
Percentage of the population within 60 mins by bus of a
major healthcare facility including community hospitals
between 10:00hrs and 16:00hrs (WCC 4a)
Calculated using the ACCESSION software based on
access to a conventional bus service
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Percentage of population within 60 minutes (by bus) of
a major healthcare facility
2003/04
2004/05
Actions-WCC
Ensure a good countywide bus network is available that
serves the hospitals
Actions-partners NHS & PCT’s:-
Provide high quality bus waiting facilities and information at
hospitals
Develop community hospitals to serve local areas
Support the County Council in providing approporiate bus
services
Risks • Main risk to this indicator relates to how it is measured
using the ACCESSION software. Currently only
conventional bus services are included to calculate the
indicator. Worcestershire County Council’s Integrated
Passenger Transport Strategy promotes the use of
demand responsive transport, shared taxis and
enhanced community transport schemes. If these forms
of transport and rail are not included then the indicator
will not be accurate.
• Delay in the opening of the three community hospitals at
Pershore, Malvern and Evesham
Comments
Worcestershire County Council will be investigating how
forms of passenger transport provision other than the
conventional bus can be accommodated within the
methodology of this indicator.
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11

Indicator
Number/Proportion of bus fleet that is low floor (WCC
4b)
Methodology
Total number of buses in operating within the County that
are low floor and fully accessible. Also expressed as a
proportion of the fleet
Relationship
BVPI 102 &104, LTP 5a&b, WCC 3b
Baseline Year 2005/2006
Baseline Data 45
Target Year 2010/2011
Target Data
60/65
Satisfactory/Stretched
Trajectory
Number of Bus Fleet that are Low Floor
Actions-WCC
Actions-partners
Risks
Comments
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Satisfactory
Stretched
• Ensure low floor vehicles are a contractual part of project
express and quality partnerships
• Make improvements to highway network to favour buses
(e.g. bus priority measures) to improve bus operation and
encourage operators to invest in new vehicles
• Purchase low floor vehicles for use on subsidised routes
• Investment in new low floor fleet
• An operator can withdraw from a route taking the high
quality vehicles
• Operator chooses to move high quality vehicles to more
commercially productive routes outside the County
The ability to access with ease the bus itself is an important
aspect of ensuring access to key services as monitored by
LTP 1a and WCC 4a although there is not a direct
relationship with these indicators.