Peter Bungard Executive Director Gloucestershire County Council Dec 2004

1. “Tackling the transport (and access) issue”Report of ‘virtual’ Transport Working GroupACTION PLAN Peter Bungard Executive Director Gloucestershire County Council Dec 2004

2. Action plan dilemma: What’s the brief? Just the bits about new partnership action – a rather strange collection of odds and ends Or the whole agenda of “Transport in Gloucestershire” – the community would only engage in this

3. 5 buttons: Nothing to do with us! We Endorse? Support action of one partner Joint partner action Advocacy

4. Action: Lobby for a solution to safety and congestion problems on A417 Nettleton to Brockworth Bypass. Needs community united behind a solution Gloucestershireconnected: Action: To secure a new “InterCity” station for Gloucestershire: “Gloucestershire Parkway” = GCC lead, but lacks development funding. Private sector will pay for build Support action of one partner We Endorse?

5. Connected internally: • Action: • Complete Gloucester SW Bypass – 2 year target • Beware A40 - Improve access to Forest of Dean by upgrading Gloucester Northern Bypass junctions – 5 year target • = GCC, but both actions reliant on access to £££s Support action of one partner

6. Targets for buses • Action: • 200,000 more bus journeys extra every year • Increase customer satisfaction • Double Park-&-Ride users over 10 yrs from 2000 base • Investigate a targetted Free Bus Day • But what factors will encourage ‘real’ people to use buses – topic for Great Glos. Debate? Support action of one partner

7. Transport VisionCheltenham and Gloucester:

8. Transport VisionCheltenham and Gloucester: • Action: • Develop a Park-&-Ride network with ‘car quality’ buses – “Secure-by-Design” accreditation for parking? • Transform quality of bus network and transport info. • Provide = GCC lead, but reliant on Government funding • Success = usage, requiring community behaviour change Support action of one partner OR Joint partner action? Many are our employees

9. A safer Gloucestershire

10. A safer Gloucestershire

11. Joint partner action A safer Gloucestershire • Action: • Halve serious and fatal casualties over 10 year period. • Police and GCC Safety Camera Partnership • New campaign to tackle 2003 60% increase in motor cycle casualties – GCC led. [45 times more likely to be killed on m/c than a car. Cotswold is worst.] • Glos. Constabulary leading nation ‘Bike Safe’ show, Cheltenham, April 2005 • Minor rural safety projects • ‘Serious Organised Crime Prevention Bill’ strengthens ”Road Policing” role [Research proven link between reduction in road policing officers and Killed/serious injury collisions] • Existing initiatives: older driver support; ‘boy racers’; drink driving • Still need an initiative to make speeding socially unacceptable – a Great Glos. Debate issue? How shocking can a campaign be? What would you ‘defend’?

12. Actions/Outcomes: • (be realistic) • ‘A’ roads in top quartile in England • Other roads to above average condition • Right first time culture • Less congestion caused by roadworks • Increasing public satisfaction • = GCC led, but highly reliant on £££s “The state ofthe roads!” • What do we know? • Recent investment in ‘A’ roads put them at 75 %ile in England • Other roads at 25 %ile in England • Gov’t target to remove local roads backlog by 2011 • Our backlog is £130+M • 2005/06 will see highest ever spend on road maintenance in Gloucestershire, but will barely touch backlog • 54% public satisfaction with roads maintenance Support action of one partner

13. Action: • Community Transport/Dial-a-Ride real time booking and extend role from mobility to accessibility for all • Increase capacity in rural areas = Taxi-Link fleet and fully accessible minibuses (extend ‘Shuttle’ concept) £116K to Rural Transport Partnership. New fleet also picking up public service routes and access to employment role • Stroud district Night-bus initiative (CDRP), Cheltenham and Gloucester – can we replicate elsewhere? • Community/Rural Transport conference by GRCC on 4 Feb 05 • Consider cost of bringing forward DDA 2016 target for fully accessible buses – estimated at 30% today • All major public sector agencies are well advanced on DDA for public access buildings • New initiative planned of local accessibility planning audits Assisting mobility and social inclusion Joint partner action

14. The big question: who is responsibility for access to health care? Cost, booking, provision. • GCC support 50,000 journeys per year: equates to 50% of all community transport journeys • Ambulance service role • PCT role • Hospital trust role • Voluntary sector – hospital car clubs • The surgery • The patient Access tohealth-care • Action: • We need a Health Transport group • £600K project proposal to roll out South Cotswold model to whole county – money not secure yet (Future Builders grant), and questions outstanding • Buses to Gloucester Royal = extend Waterwells P&R (15 mins service) • Replicate Newent model of surgery/dial-a-ride link-up • PCTs extending services available locally – community hospital, ‘Primary Care Settings’, and GP surgeries • PCT Travel Plans in development (Hospitals Trust plans in place) Joint partner action

15. Action: • Mapping exercise by Glos. Learning Partnership • Current ongoing work of 16-19 Education Transport Partnership: • Jump2Ed • Info points in schools • Travel training • Some ideas to replicate for ‘lifelong learning’ • AVOID DUPLICATION FOR NOW • Role of Community Transport, Taxi-Link and Glos Minibus Scheme in improving access to education? Access to Education I’ve taken the course that I could reach, not the one for my career ambitions Joint partner action

16. Action: • To produce an ‘Accessibility Strategy’ for Gloucestershire by July 2005, developed with partner agencies and endorsed by GSP [Statutory requirement on GCC.] Propose to use Transport Group for this task. • To produce local ‘Accessibility Plans’ for all communities by July 2006 – huge task, but should start to capture all the analysis in Parish Plans, MAIDeN, etc. [Needs a ‘Common Tool’ a.s.a.p.] The potential of Neighbourhood debates on key transport issues: speed humps; safe routes to school; etc Origins: Social Exclusion Unit “Making Connections” report “Accessibility Planning” – what is it? Key Services Centralisation Employment, Education, Health, Leisure Me, you, etc Transport Joint partner action Knowledge & evidence of need: long way to service, poor transport, difficult road to cross, bus misses surgery times, Reduce need to travel

17. Sharing vehicles • Action: • Increase use of Glos. Minibus Scheme – double usage every 6 months until April 2006 – transfer to community enterprise • Increase the number of car clubs in County – just Stroud at present • Police willing to increase partnership role of mobile police stations, if related to core business • = multi partner Joint partner action

18. Action: • Current CDRP work • Improve lighting at bus stops • Install Help points at major bus stops • Develop more door to door • transport solutions, e.g. Taxi-Link • More usage = more security • More CCTV on buses – trials planned with school bus behavior problems? • Special late night services • Car crime campaigns – critical to vibrant night-time economy • “Street scene” improvements, mainly by district councils Fear of crime: public transport, walking, car crime • At bus stops… poor street lighting • Safety on buses at night • Drug problems at interchanges • … limited police presence • Vandalism and graffiti affect people’s • confidence • Car crime • Statistically public transport is safe, but • perceptions count. Joint partner action

19. Driving attitude, road rage and flaunting traffic laws Citizenship issues A declining volunteer base, but a future based on community transport! • Issues (not yet actions): • Volunteer recruitment/retention • strategy developing • Pooling of volunteers needed • Need to recruit from new areas • – younger people • Convince employers of the benefits of • staff engagement – offer training • Behaviour issues – CCTV on buses: trial • planned • Travel training project in November • Driving attitude – not that bad • in Gloucestershire • New Traffic Management Act • more powers to control poor roadworks Volunteering in transport started with hospital cars – but now journeys are too long Misbehaviour on buses; vandalism

20. Not yet developed further • Pilots of nightclub buses for • Gloucester, Cheltenham and Stroud • Add a responsibility to venues to tackle • end of night transport issues and the • consequences of alcohol related disorder Night-time Economy • Improved information about existing services • Think community based solutions through • partnerships: car schemes, minibuses, taxis, • even mopeds • Government initiative of “kick start” • for evening and Sundays • Extend Jump Start to urban areas Lack of evening and Sunday bus services • Ongoing debate with bus companies • Some recent growth • A bus quality partnership? • Multi-agency engagement to sell the potential • Review the shape of the network Declining bus use in Stroud!

21. Action: • Have the Partnership debate! • Too big an issue to cover in initial GSP debate - if every partner/major employer takes ownership, it could make a real difference • New legislation: Traffic Management Act 2004 – mainly relates to congestion Traffic continues to grow …. Car occupancy is falling CONGESTION Kids no longer walk to school – major traffic growth of last 20 years Health … walking and cycling … obesity Health … air pollution … congestion … asthma Joint partner action It will get worse … road building out of fashion … but economy will grow …18,000 houses in Gloucester and Cheltenham area in next 12 years

22. Future GSP engagement: What have we missed? Cycling actions and targets Transport Task Group Walking Occasional single issue debates Your travel plans As individual bodies and employers …and the benefits of joining-up major employer plans

23. Additional points made at GSP meeting • Safety – refer to tri-service work with young people • More emphasis on service delivery to where the people are – re-establishing all types of local service provision • Compatibility with other strategies • Propose Transport Consequence Assessments of major decisions by GSP partners, including physical development and major organisational change • How might transport changes be paid for • 3 types of actions: • blue sky objectives or macro-trends • work in progress, but we don’t yet know answers • issues that will hit us in 2005 and we need to manage