Agenda Item 9

Report to the

Transport for South Hampshire Joint Committee

Date: 30 June 2009

Report by: John Slater, Head of Planning Services,

Portsmouth City Council

tel: 02392 834297 email: [email protected]

Subject: Local Transport Plan 3 - Options for Transport for South Hampshire

Purpose of the Report

The purpose of this report is to advise Members of the legislative requirements relating to the preparation of Local Transport Plans (LTPs) and to discuss possible options relating to the production of a joint LTP for the Transport for South Hampshire area.

Recommendations

1. The Joint Committee notes that draft Guidance on the preparation of the next Local Transport Plan round.

2. In order to maximise the time available it is recommended that the Joint Committee authorises officers to progress work on the preparation of Local Transport Plans to cover the Transport for South Hampshire area on the basis of the draft guidance.

3. Once final Department for Transport guidance is published, officers are instructed to consider the document and in a report to a future meeting advise on any new requirements that might make the constituent Transport for South Hampshire authorities wish to reconsider their approach.

DfT Draft Guidance on LTP 3

1. The current round of Local Transport Plans runs from 2006-2011 (LTP2). The three constituent Highway Authorities each produced their own LTP but a joint high level Solent Transport Strategy was included as an annexe to each of the submissions. This arrangement was well regarded showing tangible evidence of joint working on a sub regional basis.

2. The Government has produced draft guidance on the preparation of LTP 3 which need to be in place when the current plans expire in April 2011. The Local Transport Act 2008 requires the new generation of LTPs to contain a strategic policy element and an implementation plan. It no longer specifies that the length of plan period, only that they need to be kept under review.

3. The previous rounds of LTP guidance required plans to specifically address four national priorities ie accessibility, air quality, reducing congestion and reducing accidents. The current guidance expects the new LTPs to address the recently published national transport goals as set out in the DASTS document. In addition, a new emphasis has been introduced on how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport.

4. The plan need to have regard to the likely levels of capital and revenue funding based on the three year local government funding settlement and on the capital allocations made through the Regional Funding Allocation. Importantly the DfT's assessment of the quality of the LTP document will no longer directly influence the amount of funding local authorities receive.

5. The plans will have to have regard to the Regional Spatial Strategy and the authorities' Sustainable Community Strategies and linked to Local Development Frameworks within their area. They also need to be the vehicle to set transport targets which can then be monitored and assessed through the Local Area Agreement process.

6. The draft guidance makes the following comments with regard to the relationship between LTPs and Multi Area Agreements:

"Much transport is suited to planning at a sub-regional level, so take into account the economic area which transport serves. Where authorities have produced a Multi Area Agreement they may wish to consider a joint Local Transport Plan to contribute to their joint strategy".

7. Whilst every part of a local authority area must be covered by an LTP the boundaries do not need to follow the traditional local authority areas, they can reflect travel patterns or be based on a city region. Similarly the guidance acknowledges that economic areas may not coincide and it does allow authorities to consider arrangements for partnership or collaborative working, falling short of a full joint plan, reflecting the "need for clarity and accountability".

Consideration of Options

8. There are a range of options open to the TfSH constituent authorities on how to take forward their LTPs. It must be acknowledged that major issues relate to the fact that the TfSH sub region forms only part of the Hampshire County Council administrative area. One option could be a separate LTP for the TfSH area covering South Hampshire and the two cities with the County preparing a separate plan covering the remainder of the county. Alternatively there could be a common South Hampshire Strategy section, to be an integral part of individual local transport LTPs but with separate implementation plans for each authority's area.

9. The logic of a single agreed LTP strategy element across the sub-region is compelling based on the joint working that led to adoption of the Towards Delivery strategy. There are however elements of the LTP which do need to reflect the specific circumstances of individual Highway Authorities areas for example Portsmouth City Council has a PFI maintenance contract which needs to be reflected in its plan.

10. It is therefore currently considered that the most appropriate approach would be either for a separate LTP for South Hampshire or alternatively a jointly agreed South Hampshire LTP Strategy document which could then form a major part of the individual Hampshire county wide LTP and individual Southampton and Portsmouth's LTPs supplemented by separate chapters which are specific to the individual authority's situations, again with separate implementation plans. However it is important that this must meet the needs of each authority to be acceptable. It is therefore suggested that once the Guidance is finalised a further report be brought back to advise on any new requirements that might make the constituent TfSH authorities wish to reconsider their approach.

775/Rpt/JS