Agenda item

This report presents the proposed (joint with Dorset) Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4) for the BCP and Dorset areas for the period 2026 to 2041.

The document has been informed by engagement and consultation with key stakeholders, residents and the LTP4 Cross Party Working Group. 

The supporting Implementation Plan identifies the projects which are recommended to be progressed over the next five years (subject to necessary funding, consultation and approvals).

A Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy accompanies the plan setting out how progress will be measured and assessed.  

The Cabinet Member for Climate Response, Environment and Energy presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'B' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

 

This report presented the proposed (joint with Dorset) Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4) for the BCP and Dorset areas for the period 2026 to 2041.

The document was informed by engagement and consultation with key stakeholders, residents and the LTP4 Cross Party Working Group. A draft report was written and there was further consultation between August and October 2025 with 1414 responses.  The national guidance was issued in April 2026 which outlined what the DfT expected to be in the plan as it was a statutory document that had to be done.  After the guidance was published there were 3 minor amendments that had to be made, 2 of which were mentioning national incentives that they would expect to find in the document.

 

There was a 15 year strategy and a 5 year implementation plan for the first 5 years. Transport had changed over the years, and it was important that the implementation plan was flexible enough to change as the needs and ways people travel changed.

 

A Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy accompanied the plan setting out how progress would be measured and assessed.  To ensure it is on track and delivered the aims of the targets.

 

The transport plan if adopted would complement the work on the local plan which was being restarted.  The plan was a prime route to get government funding.  The consolidated local transport settlement needed an implementation plan delivered to the DfT by September 2026.

 

In the plan there were key elements in terms of transportation around sustainability agenda, public health, active travel and equality to ensure the plan meets the needs of all residents. There was some very interesting feedback on the consultation from younger people, they felt that the transport system didn’t work well for them. There were also issues for women and girls and they needed to be aware of the needs of people with disabilities and people on lower income.

 

There was a risk highlighted in the form of the forthcoming strategic authorities, the heart of Wessex as strategic transport was a power that could transfer to a strategic authority.

 

In summary it was a vision for 15 years to increase transport choice, reduce congestion, improve quality and condition of infrastructure and a big part of the spend was on existing infrastructure such as pot hols and surfacing of roads and looking after bridges.  Concentrated on safety, health, accessibility, connectivity, travel experience and reducing pollution.

 

There was a question around what could be done as a priority quickly.  This plan was a continuation of where the council had been and each February as part of setting the budget, the council had to accept the grant from government which was the consolidated transport grant which breaks down to spread across all priorities which the implementation plan highlights.

It wasn’t just about having funding for those deliverables, there were a lot of partners that were in those areas, there was a freight strategy to try and transfer more freight from the port via rail. 

 

It was about working with the western gateway, the sub-national transport body, link with the DfT and trying to lever funding for those types of initiatives from pots that were not currently available to BCP. It was also about having a strong evidence base and a clear plan in place to make that something that would happen.

 

Each year a report went through Cabinet and Council which set out planned expenditure from the local transport consolidated fund. BCP had to submit a five year local transport delivery plan to the DfT by October 26 and that very clearly set out how the money that was allocated to BCP was invested.  The other opportunities for external funding were highlighted to the DfT.

 

There was a question around school crossings and how much money was allocated to them and if it was on the priority list and how many would be done.  It was stated in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) that capital funding would be used to upgrade sites where needed.  At that moment they were upgrading circa 7 sites to achieve the MTFP target of £35,000 per year.  The cost each site varied on a site by site basis, and they needed careful assessment  to make sure they were left as safe as potentially possible.

 

With regards to Brittany Ferries pulling out of the Poole port it was stated that it was a loss to the town of Poole  and the port were actively looking to see if someone would take over the route.  It would not affect the LTP directly other than part of the mitigation, the Harbour Commissioner was very keen on the rail link which would remove a lot of HGV’s from the road. 

 

With regards to noise pollution along the Wessex way, which was mentioned as an issue it was stated that noise monitoring was up to Environmental Protection.  Trees were looked at as an option to improve that aspect, partly for climate perspective, air quality and noise absorption perspective. Examples were given of Europe where they had screens on major roads to deflect noise, that would have a cost. It could be considered if there was a scheme to improve the road but there was nothing at that point being considered.

 

There were a couple of key performance indicators around emissions in air control and only a small area was being monitored and would that increase.  Around 4% excess deaths were listed in the report, public health led on that with the council and had been working with schools and supporting through some working with Walk Wheel cycle trust.

 

It was mentioned that 3 out of the 4 members for Youth Parliament were elected after campaigning for cheaper, better and more reliable public transport. That was key as the council was always looking for ways to increase active travel, use of public transport and reduce car journeys. BCP had an enhanced bus quality partnership and have had robust conversations about school travel.  It was a revenue hit on the council and something that was not statutory and they did have to make some savings in that area last year but managed to keep some of the school buses going.  There had been conversations about inequality and costs for children and getting to school.  Morebus had come up with a proposal that cut the cost for a term pass via the app but due to the schools ban on phones had developed it to be on a card.  They were keen on the no cash methods to keep the bus to time  and keep congestion down.  In the implementation plan there was a scheme to support discounted or reduced price travel for school children,  the council were working wit the bus company as how that would operate.  The council already had through the bus partnership the £2 area wide day rider tickets for under  18s at the weekend, which was being funded through the bus service improvement partnership.

 

Bournemouth Airport was one of the top 20 busiest airports in the UK but only had 2 buses a day running to it.  There was a footpath there and people were being dropped off across the road and had to cross a busy road to get to the airport.  The transport plan did not mention transport to the airport in a sustainable way. Planning consent was granted by Christchurch Council with an hourly bus service included and they decided not to continue with it. The airport were challenged as to why they couldn’t look at an hourly service that could be funded from car park fees and they were doing an evaluation on that. BCP working with them to improve bus service and better align it as far as possible.

 

A park and ride suggestion was made, there was a site in Pole which was occupied by a business.  A park and ride was attempted several times seasonally in recent years. The park and ride from Kings Park to Boscombe cost the Council around £60,000 to operate.  There wasn’t any revenue from it and it wasn’t commercially viable. In Poole studies were undertaken around car parking  and there was a surplus of car parking spaces so a park and ride would not be viable until that was addressed.

 

Some residents depended on their cars in certain areas as they did not have buses and the strategy aimed to reduce car dependency, which would disadvantage many residents.  The Council need to ensure they were providing capacity. Reducing car dependency was not about eliminating it.  Those who used an alternative would free up capacity on the roads for people who needed to drive. There were a number of references throughout the strategy that recognised that not all solutions were appropriate for everyone or across all parts of BCP and Dorset.  After the consultation references were added around travel choice for people.

 

RESOLVED that the committee support the Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4) (2026 – 2041)

 

Voting: Unanimous