Final Local Transport Plan 2006/07 - 2010/11

The annual internal monitoring report will indicate where our progress is unsatisfactory. This will inform an annual review process described in Picture 6.2. The purpose of this review is twofold: first to ensure that targets remain challenging and achievable, and second to inform the content and structure of future work programmes. Where we are achieving challenging targets in line with trajectories, the work programme will continue as planned. In the event that we are failing to meet suitable targets, the work programme will be amended, with either a switch in resources, improvements to delivery, or the use of different techniques. Our reaction will depend on rigorous analysis of the problem, using the subsidiary and local indicators in the annual monitoring report in particular. Where the targets are found to be no longer appropriate, they will be amended, taking into account a similar set of factors as those used in the original target setting process.

There are a number of targets which we expect to have to review in the near future. These are:

• BV 102a bus patronage. Our Strategy Planning Model forecasts between 5 and 12% growth from 2001 to 2011, taking account of increasing economic activity and the LTP1 and 2 investment programme. However, to date the level of growth has not matched this forecast. · After a period of decline, adult patronage increased sharply from the beginning of 2000 until the end of 2002, but since then adult patronage has been level. Concessionary patronage (children, elderly and disabled) has been in long-term decline. These patterns are consistent with those found elsewhere outside London. The reasons for these trends are not fully understood, though it is considered that reliability problems that operators have been facing (particularly in terms of difficulties recruiting staff) and the slippage in delivery of the QBC programme have contributed to them. The future remains uncertain - operators have been introducing performance improvement plans but it is still too early to determine their impact; the QBC programme is now being implemented more quickly, but it can take some time before reliability improvements persuade passengers to return to the bus; and it is not possible to accurately predict  the impact the impact of free concessionary fares for the elderly after 9:30 am, which comes into force in April 2006 (forecasts range between 20 and 30% increase). For LTP2 we have, therefore, initially adopted a modest growth target (which given the current trends we feel is challenging, yet given the potential operator improvements, free concessionary fares and QBC implementation is achievable). However we will closely monitor this target and review it after 12 months once circumstances become clearer.
• BV 223 principal roads in need of maintenance. This is because the current targets are estimates based on insufficient data and understanding of it, due to the introduction of the new Scanner measuring technique. Additional new data is due shortly.
• BV 224a non-principal classified roads in need of maintenance. This is because the Scanner technique is currently replacing coarse visual surveys, and will be the basis for future targets.
• LTP4 modal share of journeys to school. More information on the local effectiveness of plans will help us refine this target. We will also look to use new PLASC data when it becomes available.
• LTP6 peak traffic into the Regional Centre. PSA baseline surveys are due to be completed in March 2006. This information, together with a better estimate of future job predictions, will inform the review of this target.
• LTP7 congestion. A final target will be set in the LTP1 Delivery Report in July 2006, following receipt of ITIS data from DfT and analysis and interpretation of it.
• LTP8 air quality. A review and assessment of air quality is due in 2006/07. This will involve improvements to the air quality forecasting model, not least to improve the way in which the relationship of NOx emissions and NO2 concentrations is modelled.
• LTP10 b number of raised stops. A data collection mechanism is being established for this indicator.
• LTP12a mode split to Regional Centre. As LTP6.

We found, from our experience of implementing LTP1, that we needed to strengthen the relationship between observed performance and subsequent remedial actions. We will attempt this by making sure there is a dynamic link between monitoring results and the selection, and efficiency of delivery of, subsequent schemes.

We intend to strengthen the links between the existing expert groups who influence the performance of the LTP, in particular:

• LTP topic sub-groups
  If we identify weak performance in a particular area, such as walking, cycling or road safety, this will be referred to the appropriate LTP topic sub-group. These groups contain local experts who will be able to give advice to segment working groups and other practitioners in order to redress the situation.
• Annual segment working groups
  These will be a continuation of the methodology used in the preparation of LTP2 work programmes, whereby authorities in each segment will jointly assess the latest monitoring data, and LTP topic sub-group advice, relating to problems in each segment, in order to prepare future work programmes which address any new emerging problems or weak performance.
• Greater Manchester Association of District Engineers
  This body represents the delivery end of the process, and therefore has a key role to play in ensuring schemes are well selected, designed and delivered in a cost-effective manner. Links between GMADE and the LTP process will be strengthened, with better communication between groups and further investigation of ways of improving delivery performance and effectiveness.
• Greater Manchester Planning Officers' Group
  The Planning Officers' Group has influence over land use issues in the conurbation, and thus a key role to play in controlling and managing demand for transport. A separate Transport Sub-group also exists to look at this issue in particular. Links between POG and the LTP process will be strengthened, with better communication between groups and ensuring that the transport implications of land use are considered as a central part of the planning process. The group will be able to assist with matters where a wider range of factors than just transport may be influencing performance, such as with trips to key and local centres.
• Greater Manchester Economic Development Officers' Group
  A representative from the Economic Development Officer's Group attends LTP Steering Group meetings in order to ensure that the transport infrastructure can play its role in underpinning our economic aspirations.

We will maximise our performance through a number of measures, including:

• Managing LTP delivery
  We are investigating ways of further improving the quality of information relating to spend and outcomes, both during and at the end of the financial year. This would facilitate any necessary corrective action being taken at the earliest opportunity
• Improving scheme selection and prioritisation
  Examples of best practice will be identified and shared more easily through the above groups, and using the AGMA Virtual Working Group facility, which makes it easier for a group of authorities to share information. A number of Greater Manchester Authorities have already participated in the CTC Regional Cycle Benchmarking scheme, which has influenced our approach and work programmes with regard to cycling, and we will look to take advantage of similar opportunities as they arise.
  The role of scheme monitoring will be highlighted, in order that we can investigate which techniques are the most successful so that they can be replicated on a wider scale.
  Our scheme selection procedures appraise potential schemes to ensure they will help us achieve our desired outcomes and offer good value for money. For example, Bolton MBC have a scheme assessment framework which helps prioritise different schemes according to their contribution to local, national objectives and targets, their cost-effectiveness and deliverability. GMPTE have introduced a multi-stage assessment process to consider proposals as they arise, to ensure that staff and financial resources are concentrated on developing the best schemes.