7 Targets and Indicators
7.1 Overview
The Government recognises that it is vitally important for authorities to set robust targets and trajectories
relating to local transport. It is expected that second LTPs will report targets and indicators according to the
following hierarchy:
• Targets for key programme indicators;
• Targets for intermediate outcomes;
• Targets for contributory outcome indicators; and
• Targets for any other outcome or output indicators.
The mandatory indicators and our local indicators are summarised in tables 7.1, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5 and 7.7. Table
7.7 lists all the indicators and gives an indication of the shared priorities and Mayors objectives the indicators
and targets impact upon. The following paragraphs include a short commentary on how we have developed
our targets, starting with a review of our progress towards targets in the first LTP period.
7.2 Progress within First LTP
Our achievements within the first LTP were described in Chapters 3 and 5. It is clear from the stated
headlines that our investment to date in road safety measures has paid clear dividends in the consistently
downward trend in our casualty statistics, particularly in terms of children Killed or Seriously Injured.
We have invested significantly in public transport infrastructure improvements, but this has not necessarily
delivered a complementary increase in bus patronage, and is a factor that we must address within the
second LTP.
Similarly, car traffic usage is rising, and we must take action to address this, particularly on our key
movement corridors as regeneration takes place within the Tees Valley and pressures on all modes of
travel increase.
These trends form the starting point for the development of a series of targets and indictors for the second
LTP.
7.3 Mandatory Indicators
The Off has set a number of mandatory indicators that we are required to monitor throughout the second
LTP. These consist of Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPls) ostensibly relating to road condition,
footway condition, public transport and casualty reduction, and a number of LTP indicators against which
targets must be set.
The full list of mandatory indicators against which we set targets is set out in table 7.1 below. The proposed
targets and the rationale behind their adoption are discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.
Table 7.1 Mandatory Indicators
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Reference
BVPI 223
BVPI 224(a)
BVPI 224(b)
BVPI 187
BVPI 99(x)
BVPI 99(y)
BVPI 99(z)
BVPI 102
BVPI 104
LTP1 (a)
LTP1 (b)
LTP2
LTP3
LTP4
LTP5
LTP6
LTP7
Definition
Principal Road Condition
Non-Principal Classified Road Condition
Unclassified Road Condition
Footway Condition
Total Killed and Seriously Injured Casualties
Child Killed and Seriously Injured Casualties
Total Slight Casualties
Public Transport Patronage
Bus Satisfaction
Accessibility to Major and District Centres
Accessibility to lames Cook University Hospital
Change in Area Wide Road Traffic Mileage
Cycling Trips
Mode Share of journeys to School
Bus Punctuality
Changes in Peak Period Traffic Flows to Urban Centres
Congestion
7.4 Road Condition
7.4.1 BVPI 223, 224(a), 224(b) Road Condition
BVPI 223, 224 (a), (b) Road Condition relate to the carriageway condition of principal, non-principal classified
and unclassified roads and replace BVPI 96, 97(a), (b) and have been measured over a number of years
using a number of different methods of measurement. It has not been possible to gauge trends in relation to
these indicators due to the variation in measurement, indeed to date there has not been a reliable baseline
set. The latest BVPI Guidance requires that both BVPI 223 and BVPI 224 (a) are assessed using TRACS
Type Systems.
Middlesbrough have recently appointed DCL Ltd to undertake road condition surveys for all Tees Valley
Authorities over the next 5 years. A SCANNER system will be utilised to set a reliable baseline against which
robust targets can be set and progress measured. It is expected that a baseline for BVPI 223 and BVPI
224(a) will be set in 2006 with the baseline for BVPI 224(b) set in 2007.
We are currently reported as being in the top quartile of Unitary Authorities for BVPI 97 (a) and (b), but in
the bottom quartile for BVPI 96, though these figures may be skewed by the inherent inaccuracies in the
current method of measurement. - (See table 7.2 below)
Table 7.2 Road Condition
Indicator
Principal road condition
Non-principal classified
road condition
Non-principal unclassified
road condition
Categories 1 & 2 footway
condition
Best Value
Performance Indicator
BVPI 96
Value
28.72%
Unitary performance
quartile
bottom
BVPI 97a
10.71%
top
BVPI 97b
7.39%
top
BVPI 187
22.92%
Upper Middle
Targets for the new indicators will be set once the survey information has been assessed and baselines
set. The targets will be set against the context of an ongoing maintenance backlog. It is anticipated that we
will set a 'satisfactory' target that there be no overall deterioration in condition.
7.4.2 BVPI 187 Footway Condition
This represents the percentage of the Category 1, 1a and 2 footway network that should be considered
for maintenance intervention and is measured using the Detailed Visual Inspection (DVI) method of
measurement.
A target has been set to have no overall deterioration in condition set against a 2004/2005 baseline of 22.92%
of footways exceeding the threshold for deficiencies. This a realistic target given projected levels of capital and
revenue expenditure and the need to focus on principal road condition.
7.5 Casualty Reduction Targets
BVPI 99(x), (y) and (z) relate to the number of Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) casualties, Child KSI
casualties and Slight casualties, respectively. Currently progress on these indicators shows that the overall
number of KSIs target will be difficult to achieve, the number of child casualties is generally on target and
that the number of slight casualties is well ahead of the target.
It is proposed that "5 year" targets be set against a 2001-2004 baseline for the second LTP with
progress monitored using 3 year rolling averages, given the relatively small number of casualties, all in
accordance with the current revised guidance.
7.5.1 Total KSI Casualties - BVPI 99(x)
This area of casualty reduction has been problematic with progress lagging behind the target trajectory set
out in first LTP. Progress has been disappointing even allowing for the fact that year on year volatility in the
relatively small number of casualties can skew trends. After a number of challenging years the number of
KSIs in 2004 finally provided a measure of convergence with the target trajectory. Early indications for
casualties in 2005 indicate a similar number of KSI casualties to 2004. It is to be hoped that this is the sign of
a sustained downward trend though we remain realistic as to the statistical significance of a two year
reduction in this indicator.
Figure 7.1 below shows progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory unto 2010,
using 3 year rolling averages and a 2001-2004 baseline.
90
Figure 7.1: KSI Casualties - Actual (1999/01 to 2001/04) and Target
upto 2010 (20% Reduction)
No. of KSI Casualties
80
70
60
Actual
50
Target
40
30
20
10
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Year
It is considered that it is not realistic to pursue the “10 year” target of a 40% reduction in KSIs given the
inconsistent progress to date. We will therefore pursue a “satisfactory” target to reduce the overall number of
KSls by 20% by 2010 using a 2001-2004 baseline. This gives a horizon year target of 59 KSI casualties
against a baseline of 74 casualties. This is considered to be a challenging target given progress to date.
7.5.2 Child KSI Casualties - BVPI 99(y)
We have made good progress against this indicator since 2001. The actual number of casualties in 2001
and 2004 were at or below the horizon year target of 9 casualties. Clearly the casualty numbers are so low
that they can be extremely volatile year on year. Nevertheless there is a clear downward trend inline with
that required to meet our horizon year target.
We will pursue a target to reduce the number of child KSIs by 25% by 2010 using a 2001-2004 baseline.
This gives a horizon year target of 9 child KSI casualties. This remains a very challenging target given the
very small number of casualties involved and is slightly more stretching than the corresponding indicator in
the first LTP.
Figure 7.2 below shows progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory upto 2010,
using 3 year rolling averages and a 2001-2004 baseline.
No. of Child KSI Casualties
18
Figure 7.2: Child KSI Casualties - Actual (1999/01 to 2001/04) and
Target upto 2010 (25% Reduction)
16
14
12
Actual
10
Target
8
6
4
2
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Year
7.5.3 Total Slight Casualties - BVPI 99(z)
Excellent progress has been made in terms of slight casualty reduction since 2001. A reduction in the total
number has been sustained for a number of years now. Indeed the actual number of slight casualties in 2004
(536) was 14% below the original horizon year target of 623 slight casualties.
We will pursue a target to reduce the number of slight casualties by 10% by 2010 using a 2001-2004
baseline. This gives a horizon year target of 500 slight casualties, a reduction of 28% on the original
1994-1998 baseline. This is consequently considered to be a challenging target given the relatively low
baseline.
Figure 7.3 below shows progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory unto 2010,
using 3 year rolling averages and a 2001-2004 baseline.
Figure 7.3: Slight Casualties - Actual (1999/01 to 2001/04) and Target
upto 2010 (10% Reduction)
No. of Slight Casualties
650
600
Actual
550
Target
500
450
400
2001 2002
2003
2004 2005
2006 2007
2008
2009 2010
Year
7.6.1 Public Transport Patronage - BVPI 102
Bus patronage has been on the decrease in the Tees Valley sub region and the North East as a whole,
though it must be borne in mind that these reductions are set against very high levels of usage when
compared to other areas of the country. In fact the total number of journeys made in 2004/2005 was
10,888,000 which equates to 78 journeys per head of population per annum, the highest rate in the Tees
Valley.
Figure 7.4 below shows the progress made since 2001/2002 and the proposed trajectory target.
Figure 7.4: Num ber of Bus Passenger Journeys - Actual (2001/05) and Targets upto
2010/11
No. of Bus Passenger Journeys
11,200
11,000
10,800
10,600
10,400
10,200
10,000
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
Year
Target w ith indicative funding (7% reduction)
Actual
Though patronage has decreased by 2% over the past 4 years this is below the Tees Valley average and
demonstrates that the network and level of service provision has been comparatively stable. We are aware,
however, that there have been a number of services deregistered over the past 12 months and that there
are likely to be more to follow in the coming 12 months. The patronage loss from these services will be
likely to outweigh any patronage gains (predicted at 4%) from the new concessionary fares scheme.
It is considered that the numerous infrastructure improvements delivered coupled with improved safety at bus
stops and on board buses and improved partnership working with local operators has influenced the
relatively slow rate of decline in patronage. The ongoing high level discussions between the bus operators,
the Mayor and senior Council officials have demonstrated our commitment to improving public transport
provision and has led to common actions to improve provision for passengers.
We aim to take forward the findings of the Tees Valley Bus Network Review in partnership with other Tees
Valley Authorities, particularly the Boroughs of Stockton-on-Tees and Redcar and Cleveland with whom we
share a substantial part of the network. The North East Real Time Information System is in the process of
being commissioned and will improve public transport information for the public. In addition, the revised
National Concessionary Fares Scheme will offer pensioners free travel after 9.30am and should significantly
increase patronage, though this will depend upon the existing cross boundary arrangements with
neighbouring authorities being retained.
Bus patronage remains a challenging area and will be likely to continue to decline as car ownership
increases and bus route coverage shrinks. A target of a 1% reduction per year from a 2003/2004 baseline
has been set. This is considered to be challenging but achievable. We hope to achieve this by continuing to
invest in infrastructure measures such as the bus real time information system, improved waiting facilities
and bus priority measures, improved marketing and branding of services and encouragement to use
services through targeted travel planning at key destinations and reducing the cost of public transport for key
groups such as the over 60s, 16-19 year olds and people wanting to access work and other key services.
There is an opportunity for a step change increase in bus patronage if a major scheme bid for
improvements to a number of core and super core routes were supported and the target trajectory
would be rebased if this came to fruition. Further details on potential major scheme bids arising from
the Tees Valley Bus Network Review are reported in Chapter 8.
7.6.2 Satisfaction with Local Bus Services - BVPI 104
The percentage of bus users satisfied with local bus services increased from 50% in 2000/2001 to 57% in
2003/2004, which will now be used as a baseline. It is proposed to set a 2009/2010 horizon year target of
65°/o and have an interim target of 60% for 2006/2007, which is in line with the target set in the first LTP.
This will represent a stepped trajectory, as shown in Figure 7.5 below, as the benefits arising from
improvements carried out as part of the Bus Network Review will only have an effect on satisfaction levels
towards the end of the second LTP period.
Satisfaction with Local Bus
Services
70%
Figure 7.5: Satisfaction w ith Local Bus Services - Actual (2000/01 and
2003/04) and Targets upto 2009/10
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%
40%
2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Year
Target w ith indicative funding
Actual
7.7 LTP Indicators
7.7.7 LTP is Access to Major and District Centres
These destinations provide a range of services including employment, good quality food retail, health and
leisure facilities, libraries, general practitioners etc.
7.7.2 LTP1 b Access to lames Cook University Hospital
James Cook University Hospital offers acute hospital care and an accident and emergency service
and is a major employment site.
The accessibility modelling work required to set a baseline for both these indicators is substantially complete.
As expected, the initial Accession output has indicated that the above service destinations are very
accessible by public transport with 100% and 99% of the population within 30 minutes of the major/district
centres and lames Cook University Hospital, respectively.
A target has been set to maintain the current level of accessibility.
7.7.3 LTP2 Area-Wide Road Traffic Flows
This will be measured as the change in area-wide vehicle kilometres using data from the National Traffic
Census. This indicator is included as a proxy for improvements in air quality and a reduction in green house
gas emissions. The data required to set a baseline and target is awaited.
7.7.4 LTP3 Cycling Trips
Cycling trips within the first LTP are reported at 4 automatic count sites and indicated that cycle flows had
increased by 6.7% by 2004 against a 2001 baseline. This met the interim target of a 4% increase by 2006
and is on target to meet the horizon year target of 8% by 2012.
Within the second LTP cycle trips will be measured at 6 automatic count sites. It is proposed to set a target to
increase cycle flows by 10% by the horizon year of 2010 against a 2004 baseline. It is considered
improvements to the network coupled with Smarter Choices initiatives such as travel planning and travel
awareness campaigns will facilitate this increase. Cycling to secondary schools colleges and workplaces will
be a particular focus.
Figure 7.6 below shows the annualised index for cycle trips where the actual number of trips for 2004
is 82,486 and is represented by 100 in the figure.
Cycle Route Usage Annualised
Index
Figure 7.6: Annualised Index of Actual and Target Cycle Route Usage
2002 - 2010
115%
110%
105%
Actual
100%
Target
95%
90%
85%
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Year
7.7.5 LTP4 Mode Share of Journeys to School
The data required to set a baseline and target for this indicator is not yet available from DfES. We will report
trends using existing annual hands up surveys until this information is available though no target is to be set
at this stage.
7.7.6 LTP5 Bus Punctuality
This will be measured as the percentage of scheduled services between one minute early and five minutes
late at a representative number of points throughout the Borough.
The baseline for this indicator will be established in 2005/2006 and a target will be set for full submission in
March 2006. The baseline and targets will be developed in conjunction with the bus operators as part of the
Tees Valley Bus Quality Group. It is expected that we will set a target to achieve 90% punctuality by 2010. A
stretched target of 90% punctuality by 2008 may be set if additional funding is forthcoming.
SURVEYS TO SET BASELINE CURRENTLY UNDERWAY
7.7.7 LTP6 Changes in Peak Period Traffic Flows to Urban Centres
This indicator measures the changes in peak hour traffic flow at the Town Centre Cordon. This cordon has
been monitored for a number of years and traffic flow in the peak hours has reduced by 3.2% between
2001/2002 and 2003/2004 which meets our first LTP target of reducing peak hour flows by 3% by
2004/2005. This has been achieved by a combination of measures including better management of traffic,
signing improvements, improvements for pedestrians and cyclists and reallocation of road space to buses.
It is considered that there is some scope for further reductions but that any reduction in existing movements
will be matched by increases due to the extensive development and regeneration proposals in the Town
Centre, Middlehaven and the wider North Middlesbrough area. There may, in fact, be an upward pressure
depending upon the rate at which development proceeds. Major generators such as the Middlesbrough
College proposal could be open as early as 2008 and would be likely to lead to significant crossing of the
cordon. We are currently speaking to Tees Valley Regeneration and prospective developers (including the
college) to negotiate reduced car parking levels so that more sustainable travel choices can be made.
It is therefore proposed to set a target to keep traffic levels at or below the 2003/2004 level of 22,169
vehicles over the entire second LTP period up until the 2010/2011 horizon year. This will represent a
straight line, flat trajectory.
7.7.8 LTP7 Congestion
Tees Valley Authorities are not required to monitor this indicator. Middlesbrough will nevertheless monitor
traffic levels on routes susceptible to congestion to assess growth in demand on these routes. We will also
carry out travel time surveys for all modes as part of the roll out of our route management strategy to tackle
congestion. These will be reported in future Progress Reports but a target is not proposed.
7.7.9 LTP8 Air Quality
Air Quality is monitored at 3 sites throughout the Borough. The evidence is that air quality within the Borough
is good consequently there has not been a requirement to declare an Air Quality Management Zone (AQMA).
The current trend is towards an improvement in quality therefore it is considered very unlikely that an AQMA
will be declared within the lifetime of the second LTP. We will not therefore set a specific target for air quality
though monitoring will, of course continue at the existing monitoring stations.
7.8 Intermediate Outcomes
This section details those local indicators that are considered to directly support the mandatory indicator
outcomes. The supporting text and graphs indicate progress made during the first LTP and the rationale
behind the second LTP targets.
Table 7.3 below summarises the local indicators that are considered to support the mandatory indicators.
Included in the table is a reference to the mandatory indicators that they support.
Table 7.3 Intermediate Outcome Indicators
Number
Reference
Definition
18
19
Local 1
Local 2
Rail Patronage
Mode Share of Journeys to Work
20
Local 3
21
22
23
Local 4
Local 5
Local 6
Number of Casualties in Disadvantage
Communities
Number of Child Casualties
Number of Vulnerable Road User Casualties
Traffic Flow into Town Centres
Links to Mandatory
Indicators
LTPIa, LTP7
LTP1, LTP2, LTP3,
LTP6, LTP7
BVP199
BVPI 99
BVP199
LTP2
7.8.1 Local 1 Rail Patronage
This is measured as passenger footfall at Middlesbrough Station. Patronage at Middlesbrough Station
increased 21.5% between 2001/2002 and 2004/2005. This was despite a reduction in 2002/2003 due to
the impact of the Hatfield rail crash and industrial action by ARRIVA Trains Northern.
A target has been set to increase rail patronage by 18% by 2010/2011 against a 2004/2005
baseline of 1,121,506. This will be achieved through the existing organic growth supported by
travel awareness, travel information, travel planning and marketing activities. The Middlehaven
development and wider regeneration of North Middlesbrough will be likely to increase footfall at
the station and a more stretching target may be set as and when these developments come to
fruition.
Figure 7.7 below shows the footfall data from 2001/2002 to 2004/2005 and the target
trajectory up to the 2010/2011 horizon year.
1,350,000
Figure 7.7: Rail Passenger Footfall - Actual (2001/05) and Targets upto
2010/11 (18% Increase)
Rail Passenger Footfall
1,300,000
1,250,000
1,200,000
1,150,000
1,100,000
1,050,000
1,000,000
950,000
900,000
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
Year
Target
Actual
7.8.2 Local 2 Mode Share of tourneys to Work
This will be measured as the percentage of Middlesbrough Council employees travelling to work as a car
driver and will be assessed using the Council Travel Plan annual survey. A target was set in LTP1 to
reduce the proportion of car drivers by 5% by 2006 from a 65% baseline in 2000. In 2004/2005 the staff
travel survey indicated a reduction to 64.5%. Clearly progress has not kept pace with the target trajectory
and the LTP1 horizon year target will not be achieved. This target is considered to be aspirational
particularly given that car ownership is increasing.
For LTP2 the target is to reduce the number of car drivers by 2% from the 2004/2005 baseline. This is seen
as being challenging in the context of the rate of growth in car ownership. We will seek to achieve this target
by promoting smarter choices whilst continuing to increase parking charges. A Council Travel Plan will
identify and seek to remove any institutional barriers to using sustainable travel and hidden incentives that
encourage car use.
7.8.3 Local 3 Number of Casualties in Disadvantaged Communities
This indicator measures the total number of casualties in 14 of the 15 disadvantaged communities. Overall
casualty numbers are to be used rather than just KSIs as they are more statistically relevant and reliable.
The remaining disadvantaged community is the Town Centre where the majority of the casualties involve
residents of non-disadvantaged areas within the Town and from neighbouring authority areas and further a
field.
It can be seen that we have been very successful in reducing the incidence of casualties within
disadvantaged communities with the number of casualties reducing by 9.7% between 2001 and 2004. This is
because the majority of casualty reduction schemes delivered since 2001 have been within or adjacent to
disadvantaged communities. In addition, the Road Safety Team spend more resource in these areas. We
aim to build on this success by reducing the number of casualties within disadvantaged communities by a
further 10% by 2010. This is considered to be a stretching target given the good progress already made.
Figure 7.8 below shows progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory up to 2010,
using 3 year rolling averages and a 2001-2004 baseline.
Figure 7.8: Casualties in Disadvantaged Com m unities - Actual
(1999/01 to 2001/04) and Target upto 2010 (10% Reduction)
340
No. of Casualties
330
320
310
Actual
300
Target
290
280
270
260
2001 2002
2003
2004 2005
2006 2007
2008
2009 2010
Year
7.8.4 Local 4 Number of Child Casualties
This indicator measures the total number of child casualties within the Borough and will act as a proxy to
BVPI 99(y) Child KSIs. Overall casualty numbers are to be used rather than just KSIs as they are more
statistically relevant and reliable.
Figure 7.9 below shows progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory upto 2010,
using 3 year rolling averages and a 2001-2004 baseline.
Figure 7.9: Child Casualties - Actual (1999/01 to 2001/04) and Target
upto 2010 (10% Reduction)
110
No. of Casualties
105
100
Actual
Target
95
90
85
80
2001 2002
2003
2004 2005
2006 2007
2008
2009 2010
Year
It can be seen that progress to date has been excellent with casualties having been reduced by 12.1 %
between 2001 and 2004. This is a result of casualty reduction
initiatives and, to a greater degree, our focus on road safety education and training. We aim to continue
this success by reducing the overall number of child casualties by a further 10% by 2010. This is
considered to be a challenging target given the good progress already made.
7.8.5 Local 5 Number of Vulnerable Road User Casualties
This indicator measures the number of pedestrian, cycle and motorcycle casualties within the Borough.
Overall casualty numbers are to be used rather than just KSIs as they are more statistically relevant and
reliable.
Again progress has been good with casualties down 9.4% between 2001 and 2004. The Council
participate in a number of initiatives that assist vulnerable road users such as Kerbcraft pedestrian
training, cycle training and motorcycle training. In addition, a number of engineering measures including
safer routes to school schemes, school and 20mph zones and cycleway improvements will have
benefits for this group of highway users. We aim to further reduce the number of vulnerable road user
casualties by 10% by 2010.
Figure 7.10 below shows progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory upto 2010, using
3 year rolling averages and a 2001-2004 baseline.
Figure 7.10: Vulnerable Road User Casualties - Actual (1999/01 to 2001/04)
and Target upto 2010 (10% Reduction)
No. of Casualties
210
200
Actual
190
Target
180
170
160
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
7.8.6 Local 6 Traffic Flow Into Town Centres
This indicator measures the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) flow at the Town Centre Cordon and will
act as a proxy for LTP6 Peak Period Traffic Flow. Between 2001/2002 and 2003/2004 traffic flows at the
cordon reduced by 2% which meets our LTP1 target of reducing AADT flows by 2% by 2004/2005. This has
been achieved by a combination of measures including better management of traffic, signing improvements,
improvements for pedestrians and cyclists and reallocation of road space to buses.
It is considered that there is some scope for further reductions but that any reduction in existing travel
patterns will be matched by increases due the extensive development and regeneration proposals in the
Town Centre, Middlehaven and the wider North Middlesbrough area.
It is therefore proposed to have a target to keep the Town Centre AADT flow to the 2003/2004 level of
268,964 vehicle movements until 2010/2011 using a flat, straight line trajectory.
7.9 Contributory Outcome Indicators
This section details those local contributory outcome indicators that are considered to affect the mandatory
indicator outcomes. The supporting text and graphs indicate progress made during the first LTP and the
rationale behind the second LTP targets.
Table 7.4 below summarises the local contributory outcome indicators. Included in the table is a reference
to the mandatory indicators that they affect.
Table 7.4 Contributory Outcome Indicators
Number
Reference
Definition
24
25
Local 7
Local 8
School Travel Plans
Bus Priority
26
27
Local 9
Local 10
Traffic Calmed and 20mph Roads
Satisfaction with Personalised Travel
Planning Service
28
Local 11
Links to Mandatory
Indicators
LTP4
BVPI 102,
BVPI 104,LTP5
BVPI 99
LTPI,LTP2, LTP3,
LTP6,LTP7
LTP1, LTP2, LTP3,
LTP6, LTP7
Workplace Travel Plans
7.9.1 Local 7 School Travel Plans
This indicator is intended to support LTP4 Mode share of journeys to school and measures the
percentage of schools that have developed travel plans.
We met our LTP1 commitment to develop school travel plans with 50% of our schools by 2005. Currently,
32 of our 55 schools have adopted travel plans, which equates to 58% of all schools within the Borough.
It is proposed to set a target to develop travel plans at 100% of schools willing to participate by 2008, two
years ahead of the national DfES target. This will represent a straight line trajectory. There is likely to be a
number of new schools or amalgamation of schools developed over coming year as part of the Schools For
The Future Initiative and due to the falling school rolls. This will be likely to mean that development of travel
plans will go beyond the horizon year but only where replacement schools are developed or where travel
patterns to existing schools have been altered by changing catchment areas. Figure 7.17 below shows
progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory upto 2010/2017, compared to the national
WES target.
Figure 7.11: Num ber of Schools w ith Travel Plans - Actual (2001/02 to
2004/05) and Targets upto 2010/11
No. of Schools with Travel
Plans
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
Year
Middlesbrough Council Target
DfES Target
Actual
7.9.2 Local 8 Bus Priority
This indicator will measure the percentage of traffic signal controlled junctions that incorporate bus real time
equipment that enables buses to be given priority over other traffic.
There are currently 5 junctions within the Borough that incorporate such equipment. These were installed at
the request of Arriva North East as be part of the initial phase of the North East Real Time Information
project. The roll out of future improvements will reflect the priorities set out in the Bus Network Review and
these signal installation improvements will be likely to part of a larger package of measures on specific
categories of routes.
It is proposed to set a target to incorporate this equipment at 35% of the 48 traffic signal controlled junctions
within the Borough by 2010/2011, which equates to 17 junctions. This indicator will report against a baseline
of 13 % by 2006.
7.9.3 Local 9 Traffic Calmed and 20mph Roads
The development of extensive 20mph zones and traffic calmed routes is considered to be one of the main
reasons why casualty levels within the Borough are at an all time low. These schemes are implemented
where the potential for casualty savings is at its greatest and therefore offer value for money. They are also
considered to be one of the main reasons why there is little difference between casualty rates within
disadvantaged areas and non-disadvantaged areas.
This is therefore seen as a proxy indicator for BVP199(z) Slight Casualties and the local indicators covering
accidents in disadvantaged areas, total child casualties and vulnerable road user casualties. An audit to
determine a baseline length of treated routes is currently being conducted by Council staff. The 2004/2005
baseline will express this as a percentage of the overall length of residential roads.
7.9.4 Local 10 Satisfaction with Personalised Travel Planning Service
We have just appointed a personalised travel planner to trial this method of encouraging residents to make
more sustainable travel choices. Initially the appointee will work with disadvantaged communities giving
advice of the travel options available to access key services, such as health, training or employment. The
process will include monitoring of performance with one of the main indicators being satisfaction with the
service.
It is proposed to develop a target to have 75% satisfaction with the service in 2005/2006 rising to 85%
by 2010/2011. This will have a straight-line trajectory.
7.9.5 Local 11 Workplace Travel Plans
This will measure the percentage of employees working for major employers (>200 employees) covered by
travel plans.
This was an LTP1 indicator that we did not meet due to the lack of a dedicated workplace travel plan
co-ordinator. We have chosen to recommit to this activity and have recently appointed a links to employment
travel advisor to assist local businesses with the development of travel plans.
It is proposed to set a target to have 60% of staff employed by major employers covered by travel plans by
2010/2011 against a baseline of 28% in 2004/2005. This will have a straight line trajectory. Figure 7.12 below
shows the progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory upto 2010/2011.
Figure 7.12: Percentage of Em ployees w ith Travel Plans - Actual (2001/02 to
2004/05) and Targets upto 2010/11
% of Employees with Travel
Plans
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
Year
Target
Actual
7.10 Other Outcomes and Outputs Indicators
This section details those local outcome or output indicators that are considered to influence the mandatory
indicator outcomes. The supporting text and graphs indicate progress made during the first LTP and the
rationale behind the second LTP targets.
Table 7.5 below summarises these outcome and output indicators. Included in the table is a reference to
the mandatory indicators that they influence.
Table 7.5 Other Outcome and Output Indicators
Number
Reference
Definition
29
30
Local 12
Local 13
CCTV on Buses
Low Floor Bus Infrastructure
I
Links to Mandatory
Indicators
BVP102, BVP104
BVPI02, BVP104
7.10.1 Local 12 CCTV on Buses
This will measure the number of buses operating within the Borough that have had CCTV equipment fitted
in partnership with Middlesbrough Council.
A total of 59 buses have been fitted with CCTV to date. It is proposed to set a target to have a total of 100
buses fitted by 2010/2011. This target will have a straight line trajectory from a 2005/2006 baseline.
The bus operators are strongly in support of this initiative and report that the incidence of violence, abusive
and threatening behaviour and criminal damage have reduced. This has obvious benefits for passengers
but also helps bus companies in terms of losses due to damage and bogus compensation claims, loss of
drivers due to violent incidents or stress caused by the threat of such incidents and loss of vehicles whilst
they are being repaired.
We are also currently trialing the installation of inconspicuous CCTV equipment within bus shelters in order
to reduce the incidence of criminal damage and protect this important resource developed in partnership
with Adshel. We do not intend to set a specific target associated with this but will report progress on this
activity in future progress reports.
7.10.2 Local 13 Low Floor Bus Infrastructure
LTP1 sets
a target to provide low floor bus infrastructure on all Green Transport Corridors by 2005. This target
has now been met with 184 (27.9%) of the Borough's 660 bus stops converted. It is proposed to set a new
target to convert 40% of the Borough's bus stops to be low floor accessible by 2010/2011.
Figure 7.13 below shows the progress made since 2001 and the proposed target trajectory upto 2010/2011.
Figure 7.13: Percentage of Low Floor Accessible Bus Stops - Actual (2001/02 to
2004/05) and Targets upto 2010/11
60%
% of Bus Stops
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
Year
Actual
Target w ith indicative funding
7.11 Quality of Life Indicators
The preceding chapters describe the role transport has in delivering sustainable regeneration and how the
wealth created can impact on certain measures of Quality of Life within Middlesbrough and the Tees Valley
sub-region.
Transport improvements can influence and, to a degree, directly affect Quality of Life issues and so
reduce the health, employment, educational and economic inequalities between the Town and other areas
of the Country. The evolving Accessibility Strategy will identify key interventions required in transport
services to reduce social exclusion and improve the quality of peoples lives.
We will therefore monitor the Quality of Life indicators listed below. Targets will not be set as it is recognised
that transport is just one influence on quality of life outcomes.
• Unemployment Rates.
• Social exclusion - % of wards within the 10% most deprived.
• Mortality rates.
• Educational attainment
• GDP per capita
7.12 Monitoring
The monitoring regime for many of these indicators is already developed having been monitored as part of
the LTP1 process. A number of new indicators will rely on annual information from DFT and WES.
Agreement has been reached with public transport providers to release information for the appropriate
indicators.
The level of monitoring will be greatly reduced compared to LTP1. There are a total of 30 indicators
proposed compared to in excess of 80 in the first LTP. Many of the indicators are measured for other
reasons i.e. BVPls. The proposed monitoring regime will therefore be robust and streamlined.
7.13 Risk Management
Table 7.6 below provides a full assessment of risk associated with the above indicators and identifies the main
control measures to be employed to manage the risk of non-achievement of targets.
Indicator Reference
BVPI223,BVPI224(a)B
VPI224(b) – Road
Condition
BVPI187 – Footway
Condition
Sources and Risk
Triggers
 Reliability of
results from new
survey monitoring
methodology
 Availability of
financial
resources to
prevent a decline
in overall network
standard
 Deterioration of
road condition
causing personal
injury accidents
 Availability of
financial
resources to
ensure best value
through the
delivery of high
quality
sustainable
schemes (life
costing)
 Limited revenue
funding available
to limit decline of
footpath condition
 Deterioration of
footpath condition
causing personal
injury accidents
 Utility intrusion
into footways with
poor
reinstatement
Impacts and
Consequences
 Unreliable survey
results, thus poor
knowledge base
 Increased
percentage of
roads failing to
meet satisfactory
standard
 Increase in third
party claims
 Only minimum
short term road
condition standard
met
Control Measures





BVPI99(x) – Total
killed and seriously
injured casualties
BVPI99(y) – Child
killed and seriously
injured casualties
BVPI99 (z) – Total
slight casualties



Negative media
attention
regarding traffic &
speed
management
measures
Increase in
casualty figures
Failure to change
driver behaviour



Increased
percentage of
footpaths failing to
meet satisfactory
standards
Increased number
of third party
claims
Minimal standards
met,
attractiveness of
streetscape
limited
Premature failure
of footway
structure &
reinstatements
Lengthy
consultation time
regarding traffic
calming schemes
Possible public
rejection of traffic
safety schemes
Higher incidence
of casualties










Ensuring
mechanical
measurement
methodology is
robust/accurate &
well understood
Early intervention
to limit the decline
in road condition
Adequate
resources to be
made available to
raise the network
standard
Development of
Highways
Maintenance
Management Plan
Early intervention
to limit the decline
in footpath
condition
Adequate
resources
available to raise
the network
standard
Development of
Highways
Maintenance
Management Plan
Proper
management of
Utility works
Mix of initiatives to
increase road
safety, hard and
soft measures
e.g. traffic safety
schemes/ ETP
Development of
Urban Safety
Management Plan
Positive media
information about
casualty reduction
measures
BVPI102 – Public
transport patronage







Increased car
ownership
Reduction in bus
usage
Reduction in bus
service coverage,
availability &
reliability
Reduction in &
quality of vehicles
Ageing population
Increase in crime
incidents on the
public transport
network
Negative media
information about
public transport





Declining bus
patronage
Poor accessibility
Increased
congestion
Raised public
perception of
crime & fear of
crime on the
public transport
network
Poor public
perception of
public transport
overall






BVPI104 – Bus
Satisfaction




Decline in bus
satisfaction
Increase in crime
incidents on the
public transport
network
Negative media
information about
bus services
Increase in age &
reduction in
vehicle quality



Poor perception of
buses
Raised public
perception of
crime & fear of
crime on the bus
network
Declining bus
usage




Implement
findings from the
bus network
review
Implementation of
the real time
information
system
Improving safety
measures on
buses & at bus
waiting facilities
Production of the
Accessibility
strategy to identify
gaps in the
provision of public
transport
Retention of cross
boundary
arrangements for
concessionary
fares
Positive media
information giving
facts about
benefits of bus
travel
Implementation of
the real time
information
system
Improving safety
on buses & at bus
waiting facilities
Continuing
improvements to
the bus
infrastructure e.g.
better bus waiting
facilities
Analysis of bus
satisfaction data
to determine
trends
LTP1(a) –
Accessibility to Town
and District Centres
LTP1 (b) –
Accessibility to James
Cook University
Hospital



Increase in car
ownership
Reduction in the
provision of public
transport to key
destinations
New development
sites






Increased
congestion
Poorer
accessibility to
key destinations
Limited travel
horizons
especially for
disadvantaged
communities
Missed hospital
appointments
Reduced choice
for shopping &
leisure facilities
Reduced access
to employment





LTP2 – Change in
area wide Road traffic
mileage


Increase in car
ownership
Increase in traffic
flows on key
routes and near
key regeneration
sites





LTP3 – Cycling Trips


Decrease in
number of cycling
trips
Increased number
of trips involving
vulnerable road
users (Cyclists)



Increased
congestion
Increased
pollution & health
problems
Inactive lifestyle
leading to poorer
health
Negative effects
on regeneration
initiatives
Reduced public
transport use
Increased
congestion and
pollution
Poorer health
Increase in
cycling casualties







Production of
accessibility
strategy
Improved
marketing to
promote
alternative
sustainable forms
of travel & travel
planning advice
Implementation of
the real time
information
system
Continue to
develop quality
partnerships with
bus operators
Assessment
software
(Accession)
shows currently
that there is good
accessibility to
key destinations
Continuation of
personalised
travel planning
service
Raising travel
awareness
through marketing
campaigns
Continuation of
workplace and
school travel
plans
Continuation with
improvements to
the national cycle
routes
Promotion of
cycling as a
healthy form of
transport & for
recreation
Provision of offroad cycling
routes to key
destinations
Improved safety
info for cyclists &
car users
LTP4 – Mode Share of
Journeys to School




LTP5 – Bus
Punctuality




LTP6 – Changes in
Peak Period Traffic
Flows to Urban
Centres

Increase in
journeys to school
by car
Availability of
funding to provide
more safe routes
to school
Amalgamation of
schools to bigger
sites
Parental choice

Late or early
arrival of buses
according to
timetable
Availability of
funding
Increase/
decrease in bus
bus patronage
Dependency upon
local bus
operators

Decrease/
Increase in peak
period traffic flows









LTP7 – Congestion





Increased car
ownership
Increased
pollution
Increased road
traffic accidents
Increased car
parking usage
Increased risk to
other road users





Increased
congestion,
especially at
school entrances
Children become
inactive leading to
health problems
Large number of
pupils due to
amalgamation
Longer journeys
and complicated
travel patterns
Unreliable bus
services
Less services
available, longer
timetable intervals
Limited public
transport choices
Restraint upon
regeneration

Restraint upon
regeneration/
Economic vitality
Increased
congestion
Increased journey
times for those
travelling to/from
work

Demand greater
than capacity
Longer journey
times
Regeneration and
economic vitality
may suffer
Heavily congested
town centre
leading to poorer
accessibility
Increased
casualties












Continuation of
school travel
plans
Increased
marketing relating
to sustainable
forms of travel
Continuation of
child pedestrian
training
Development of
more walking bus
schemes
Continuation of
funding for
supported bus
services
Implementation of
bus network
review, increasing
reliability
Bus real time
information &
GPS bus tracking
Continuation of
monitoring/
improving
network capacity
Continuation of
marketing and
publicity
increasing travel
awareness
Further develop
the role of traffic
management
Continuation of
monitoring/
improving
network capacity
Continuation of
marketing and
publicity
increasing travel
awareness
Further develop
the role of traffic
management
Enhancement of
variable message
signage