Archived decisions

Contact: Paul Basham, ext 6054

1. Summary

1.1 This report reviews progress on the Capital Programme and allocation within the New Forest Transport Strategy (NFTS) and Coastal Towns Transport Strategy (CTTS) programme. Progress on these schemes is detailed in a separate report on the agenda. This report also provides an update on the delivery of the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and the content of Hampshire County Council's second Annual Progress Report (APR), submitted to the Government Office for the South East (GOSE) and the Department for Transport (DfT) on 31 July 2002.

2. Capital Programme

2.1 On 10 September 2002 the Executive Member for Environment approved amendments to the 2002/03 transport capital programme by increasing allocations for Winchester Station Interchange, Chandler's Ford Rail Station, the A33 in Basingstoke and Petersfield town centre. The current forecasts for capital expenditure on transport in 2003/04, including preparation costs of Phase 1 of the South Hampshire Rapid Transit (SHRT) project, show an excess of spending over resources. Although additional resources are being sought from the DfT through the LTP process, a contingency plan needs to be prepared in case extra funding is not made available. The Area Strategy Panels were therefore requested to review their programmes for 2003/04 and 2002/03 schemes not yet committed, and advise the Executive Member on priorities for early implementation.

3. County-wide Overall Funding Position

3.1 The current forecasts of overall funding for 2003/04 for transport, including SHRT preparation, integrated transport (Area Strategies and county-wide programmes) and structural maintenance of highways and bridges again show an excess of spending over resources. Additional funding is being sought through a major scheme bid with respect to the A3 Bus Priority Scheme and also through the LTP process, but again a contingency plan needs to be considered in case funding is not made available in 2003/04. Decisions are expected from the Government in December 2002 on the funding support available for the County Council in 2003/04.

Progress on the County-wide 2002/03 Programme

3.2 The 2002/03 capital programme was approved in January 2002 and amended at the Executive Member meeting in May 2002. A number of schemes were carried forward from the 2001/02 programme together and some credit approvals were also carried forward into 2002/03.

3.3 In summary, the 2002/03 transport capital programme position (credit approval funded schemes only) is now as follows:

Spending Forecast (includes spending from schemes started in 2001/02 and before and fees for future schemes)

Resources Available (to cover spending in 2002/03)

3.4 Additional resources have been sought to cover the difference between the forecast and the resources. In the event of no additional resources becoming available the 2002/03 integrated transport spending will be held at no more than £17.1 million so that spending balances resources. This will result in an additional £4.3 million integrated transport spending being incurred in 2003/04. The full programme for NFTS and CTTS is attached as an appendix.

4. County-wide Funding Position 2003/04

4.1 The County Council has indicative allocations of Government funding through the LTP process for the period 2003/04 to 2005/06. These allocations do not include any increased allocations that may come forward as a result of the latest Annual Progress Report submission, through the single capital pot or as a result of the major scheme bid made for the A3 Bus Corridor project.

The indicative allocations are:

4.2 The current spending forecasts (assuming a £17.1 million spend in 2002/03 on integrated transport) and full implementation of the currently approved programme plus the A3 and Light Rapid Transit/SHRT projects are:

4.3 The above totals show a forecast spending above minimum resource levels. Information will not be available until mid-December 2002 concerning any additional funding for 2003/04 from the LTP process, specific support for major schemes (SHRT or A3 corridor) or funding through the single capital pot. The Hampshire programmes have been deliberately prepared above these minimum resource levels so that the County Council is in a good position to respond to any new initiatives and funding sources.

5. Annual Progress Report 2002

5.1 This section of the report provides an update on delivery of the LTP and the content of the Hampshire County Council's second APR, submitted to GOSE and the DfT on 31 July 2002.

6. Background

6.1 As part of the overall LTP process the County Council has a statutory obligation under Section 108 of the Transport Act 2000 to produce an APR for the DfT. The APR is the chief mechanism for reporting back to Central Government on how the LTP is being implemented, showing progress made in working towards national and local objectives and targets. The APR also provides an opportunity to show how progress is being monitored and reports on particular achievements in delivering the LTP to residents, interest groups and other stakeholders.

6.2 The APR document highlights the substantial progress which has been made during 2001/02, focussing on:

(i) increased investment in integrated transport (public transport, safety, cycling, walking);

(ii) increased investment in roads maintenance and bridges;

(iii) progress towards headline targets, particularly with casualty reduction and travel plans;

(iv) advances in partnership working, public participation and consultation;

(v) workplace and school travel plans; and

(vi) dissemination of good practice as a Centre of Excellence and learning from others.

6.3 The format of the document has been strongly influenced by guidance produced by Central Government, advising local authorities of the information to be included in the second APRs. Much of the guidance was similar to last year, with two key principles highlighted, that the APR should:

(i) be the mechanism by which authorities report the progress they are making in implementing their LTP and working towards their local objectives, targets and outcomes; and

(ii) focus on the progress being made on the ground in delivering an authority's integrated transport strategy - identifying the achievements made, including examples of schemes completed, rather than dwelling on future aspirations.

6.4 Greater importance has been placed on monitoring delivery of the programme and progress towards achieving the objectives and targets included in the LTP, together with the indicators which are used to assess this. This year's APR document was therefore written to reflect this change of emphasis, including the identification of a set of nine core indicators in addition to the extensive county-wide and individual area strategy targets. These are being considered to identify which are the most applicable and relevant to each area's programme of schemes.

6.5 In addition to a comprehensive assessment of progress being made towards the county-wide objectives and targets, a similar approach was adopted for the NFTS. All indicators have been measured where possible and the opportunity taken to rationalise the information collected. The objectives are consistent across each strategy area as far as practicable. However, recognition of the diverse nature of Hampshire's urban and rural areas is acknowledged and therefore the actual targets and objectives vary from area to area to reflect this. Although it is still early in delivering the projects in the LTP, the majority of indicators are on target and monitoring will continue throughout the LTP period.

6.6 Appendices produced to support the APR also include a significant amount of detail on the progress and impact of schemes in each of the strategy areas, and an indication of how each one contributes to the County Council's corporate objectives and the LTP policy areas. This helps demonstrate the extensive and diverse programmes being delivered within each area and provides an assessment of their impact. The impact of each scheme is being considered in formulating changes and amendments to future years' programmes, to ensure that the outputs delivered contribute to outcomes in terms of modal choice or changes in travel behaviour. The close links each project has with the County Council's corporate objectives and overall policy aims is clearly demonstrated. The benefits of each scheme often go far wider than their immediate impact and, added together, the expensive programme has a positive benefit over a wide range of areas.

6.7 In May 2002, as part of the preparation of the second APR, key stakeholders and the general public were consulted on progress to date and how the transportation strategy will be delivered until the end of the LTP period. In particular, stakeholders' views were sought on both the progress made and the County Council's approach, and these were incorporated into the APR where appropriate.

6.8 The APR also includes three bids for supplementary funding for the CIVITAS European project, bridge parapets and safety fences and street lighting. In addition, a separate document was submitted for one major scheme seeking funding for the Integrated A3 Bus Priority Corridor.

6.9 GOSE and the DfT are now considering the APR with a formal response expected in December 2002. At that time the indicative allocations for funding in 2003/04 will be confirmed and comments made on the APR document itself and the progress made in delivering the capital programme.

Recommendation

That the report be noted.

7509/PB