Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Transport Services Business Plan

2009/10-2011/12

MASTER DRAFT – 22 nd December 2008

Final Version

238 City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Foreword

The agenda for 2009/10 and beyond in transport is undoubtedly one that creates opportunities – opportunities that the ambitious Transport Services teams are keen to embrace. The TIF bid, Local Transport Bill, Community Strategy, Local Area Agreement and, the creation of our new Local Development Framework, all create an environment in which Transport Services must reformulate its approach.

The City Council has a key role to play in seizing these opportunities and turning them to the advantage of the individuals, communities and businesses in Manchester – in other words to deliver the aims of the Community Strategy. The opportunities that Manchester must seize on relate to: • better delivery to customers of transport services • better planning and resourcing of future transport • the opportunity to better capitalise on the chance to take more control of decision-making in transport.

Better service delivery to customers

At the centre of improving service to customers across the community is the outcome of the work of the Highways Service Improvement Project. This project brings with it both a series of efficiency savings that are incorporated into this plan and a better focus on the customer and customer service. Members of the public, as well as Councillors and internal clients will, from March 2009, have a single point of contact when dealing with a host of highways issues ranging from roads maintenance to promoting new works. The new customer-focussed team will be complemented by new client and network operations and works delivery functions which will be developed in 2009/10. The aim is to continue to develop the newly established joined-up service for all highway matters leading to better management and investment decisions in relation to the way that Manchester’s highway assets contribute to the Council’s Community Strategy.

Delivery of the Local Transport Plan 2 (2006/07 – 2011/12) is at the heart of much of the work of the transport services team. An annual survey is carried out to review whether Manchester is on track in delivering against this plan – this year’s review, which is nearing completion, suggests the following priorities for 2009/10:

• Building on the success of recent years, further reducing the number of casualties and fatalities associated with road traffic incidents. This links to the Community Strategy and Corporate Plan priorities and in particular travel planning work and the implementation of the ‘safe routes to school’ programme • Continuing to support a range of measures, which encourage a higher proportion of journeys to be made by public transport, on foot or by bike. Whilst this has an obvious impact on road congestion it also has a major

239 Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

impact on the environment – and takes its place in the “greening the city” agenda. • Supporting physical improvements to local centres and neighbourhoods – enhancing the sense of community well-being and cohesiveness that is a key theme in the Community Strategy • Improving the way in which we monitor against plan delivery and set in place remedial actions where we are falling short of our targets.

The introduction of the Neighbourhood Funding Strategy has highlighted that the local demand for Highway Services exceeds the resources available to maintain local road, footway and alleyway surfaces, including drainage, and to provide local traffic calming, pedestrian crossings and on-street residential parking as well as to improve the open spaces and provide street trees. A review of funding priorities and sources is a high priority for 2009.

Finally, much of the delivery of transport in Manchester depends on skilled partnership working between the city and other bodies – both in the public and private sector. These partners include: the Association of Authorities; Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority; local schools and businesses; regional bodies; Manchester Group; and and rail operating companies. These core skills of partnership working need to be honed across the Transport Services teams. It is relevant to this business plan that in a number of cases this partnership working brings with it substantial third party incomes to the Transport Services team.

Better planning and resourcing of transport

At the end of July 2007 the Greater Manchester Authorities submitted a bid to the Government’s Transport Innovation Fund (TIF). The bid was for a package of around £3bn of transport investment coupled with the introduction of a peak hour congestion-charging scheme. Following the outcome of the referendum, AGMA decided not to proceed with the TIF bid and work will now need to be put in place to examine other ways of funding the transport investment required to maintain the economic competitiveness of the city- region. A major area of work for the transport team is the Regional Centre Transport Strategy (RCTS). The need for the RCTS is to support the Council’s ambition for Manchester to become a world-class city, supported by a world-class transport system. The Strategy will support the creation of new public squares and other public realm improvements, making it a safer, more attractive city centre for pedestrians and cyclists, whilst maintaining essential accessibility for city centre businesses and residents, together with meeting the additional public transport capacity demand created by policies to switch commuter journey’s from car to public transport. These themes also relate very strongly to imperatives in the Community Strategy around Manchester residents feeling a sense of connection to their neighbourhoods and their city.

Looking forward, it is also important that the work of the Transport Policy Unit can be focussed on meeting the aspirations of the Community Strategy/LAA

240 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

and Working Neighbourhoods Fund (WNF), to ensure that transport plays a key role in tackling social exclusion and deprivation. One of the key objectives of WNF is to reduce the barriers that poor understanding of transport options can present to those seeking to overcome the trap of worklessness.

Finally, in planning for the future the transport teams need to strengthen the linkages between transport planning and the development of the City’s physical and social fabric. Transport leads in the city must play their part in the development of the Greater Manchester Strategic Plan – a plan that must also set out an agenda for Greater Manchester taking more control of its destiny. In the city itself it is vital that the Planning and Transport teams work more closely together in the development of the Local Development Framework. Likewise there is a need to ensure that transport plays its role in the implementation of the Community Strategy – through the Manchester Partnership, the newly inaugurated Economic Development Board, and the Transport Thematic Partnership. There is an opportunity through all of this work to better connect transport to the needs of businesses, communities, and the health, education and training sectors.

More control of transport decision-making

The Local Transport Act creates an opportunity for Greater Manchester to review the way in which it makes decisions around transport. The Act contains proposals to give local authorities a greater say in the way that local bus services are provided and sets out a process for reforming the way by which local transport services are delivered in the major city regions. A pre- requisite for making such changes is gaining the confidence of the Secretary of State for Transport – as any new arrangements must be approved by him/her. A well functioning Transport Services team, pushing the boundaries of what might otherwise be interpreted as a narrow remit, is key to gaining this confidence in order that Manchester is best served in future.

Changes required in Transport Services

The business plan makes a case for filling most of the small number of existing vacancies within the Transport Policy Unit in order to deliver Manchester’s key priorities around Metrolink Phase 3a, the RCTS, including the remodelling of Gardens, City Crossing consultation and addressing worklessness. This move will inevitably create a modest budget pressure but it is essential if we are to cope with the significant external pressures (see section 1.2 below).

…………………………… …………………………… ……………………………… Stephen Clark Chris Barber Councillor Richard Cowell Head of Transport Head of Highway Services Executive Member for Environment

241 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

CONTENTS

Page Foreword

Section 1 Business Analysis 1.1 Introduction to the Business 6 1.2 Key Drivers for Change 7 1.3 Contribution to the Corporate Plan 9 1.4 Strategic Risk Analysis 21 1.5 Customer and Neighbourhood Analysis 23 1.6 Performance Analysis 26 1.7 Value for Money Analysis 28 1.8 Work Force Analysis 31 1.9 Financial Drivers 33 1.10 Partnerships, Key Linkages and Cross Cutting Issues 35 1.11 Business Continuity 35

Section 2 Business Objectives and Performances Measures 36

Section 3 Operational Plans

3.1 Business Financial Plan 46 3.2 Business Work Force Plan 54 3.3 Business Risk Register 62

Appendix A 65

242 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Section 1: Business Analysis

1.1 Introduction To The Business

Our VISION for our service is:

To achieve a world class transport network that allows all residents, businesses and visitors to access economic, learning and recreational opportunities across the city in a manner that is environmentally- friendly, safe and affordable.

And our MISSION is:

To provide, through our own work and that of partners, high quality day- to-day transport and highway services that residents, councillors and visitors can take pride in, developing and implementing transport policies and strategies that will help shape the City’s future transport network.

To improve the environment for everyone by achieving transport services and a highways network that is safe, sustainable and accessible for all

There are two divisions within Transport Services in the Chief Executive’s Department: Transport Policy Unit and Highway Services.

Manchester City Council acts as the Lead Authority for the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority and, with its GM partners, provides the strategic framework for regional and local transport planning and policy: it is supported in this by the Transport Policy Unit.

The Transport Policy Unit has four teams:

• City Team - delivering the transport policy for the City; inputting into regional and sub-regional strategy; and monitoring the Local Transport Plan (LTP) • Travel Change Team, delivering travel behaviour change programmes to a range of organisations throughout the city through, for example, the travel planning process • PTA Policy Team, delivers a dedicated policy function to the GMPTA • Committee Team, which in addition to providing democratic services to the GMPTA, provides Company secretarial support to a range of key partners and stakeholders throughout the City

243 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Highway Services delivers elements of the Greater Manchester LTP2 and manages and maintains the highway network within Manchester, including: • Highways Network and traffic management • Highways Maintenance and Improvements • Bridges Maintenance and Improvements • Street Lighting - through a PFI supplier • Environmental and Landscape design services • Road Safety and School Crossing Patrol

As a whole the service provides the statutory function of ‘Highway Authority’ on behalf of the City Council.

The service also has two teams who work on behalf of the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities:

• Greater Manchester Transportation Unit (GMTU) - which undertakes transportation modelling for Greater Manchester and supports the Transportation Service • Greater Manchester Urban Traffic Control team, which manages UTC on behalf of all the AGMA.

Working in partnership with AGMA and the PTA, the service has seconded staff to the joint delivery team for the major expansion of the Metrolink 3a system.

In 2008/09 Transport Services managed budgets (excluding AGMA and GMPTA) in excess of £24M revenue and £18M capital. Average staffing levels were:

22 Transport Policy 81 MEDC 64 Technical Services 177 Road Safety and School Crossings 43 GMUTC 46 GMTU

433 permanent in-house staff, supplemented by 21temporary and framework consultancy staff assisting in delivering some core services, peaks in workload and some specialist projects.

1.2 Key Drivers for Change

Very significant pressures at local, sub-regional and national level have emerged in the past two years. It is vital that we are resourced to address these pressures in order that Manchester can successfully deliver on these transformational challenges. The key changes in national, regional and local policies that will affect the service over the next few years, include:

244 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

• Implementation of Metrolink Phase 3a – this has been funded by Government. The scheme represents a very significant public transport investment in north, east and south Manchester. Preliminary works have commenced and full implementation of the scheme will progress throughout the life of this plan

• Regional Centre Transport Strategy (RCTS) - this strategy for the Regional Centre has been developed by MCC, in close consultation with GMPTA/E. It brings together those capital scheme proposals to present a strategy to deliver an integrated and sustainable transport network which is able to respond to economic growth. The RCTS complements the Strategic Plan 2007/08-2013/14 (CCSP)

• Local Area Agreement (LAA) – the agreement between MCC, its partners and Government provides a challenging vision for the City to 2015. Transportation Services will have a significant contribution towards achieving the priorities set out in the vision – Sustainable Economic Growth ; Reaching Full Potential in Education and Employment; Promoting Individual and Collective Self Esteem - Mutual Respect ; and Creating Neighbourhoods of Choice . The Community Strategy/LAA complements the aspiration of the Working Neighbourhoods Fund (WNF) which seeks to ensure that transport plays a key role in tackling social exclusion and deprivation.

• Manchester Area Agreement (MAA) – (this is also the Multi Area Agreement) proposes a range of actions and targets a spectrum of issues that the authority feels are best tackled on a sub-regional basis, such as transport, business support and skills and employment.

• Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy (SMOTS) – promotes sustainable transport alternatives, including walking, cycling and public transport, to schools and further education establishments and is a key driver in the travel behavioural change programme, complemented by, for example, the City Council’s staff travel plan, Get on Board.

• The Manchester Improvement Programme - the associated efficiency savings will require the implementation of new ways of working, including in partnership with the private sector. The emphasis is on: developing the best customer experience; better overall control and management of the service; and enabling more to be done for the same money through the highways capital programme. • Neighbourhood Funding Strategy – The Highways Service had a very high number of requests for action from Ward Members as part of the Neighbourhood Funding Strategy. The requests have highlighted the need to do more to address local highway issues that affect residents’ view of their neighbourhood being a place they choose to live in.

245 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

• The Local Transport Act will provide greater local control over bus services, provide a mechanism for us to review our transport governance arrangements and give us greater powers to effectively tackle traffic congestion.

• Recent policy reviews that will impact on transport and the economy - the Eddington Study, the Sub-national Review of Economic Development, Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS), major Rail Policy documents, Delivering a Sustainable Transport Strategy (DaSTs) and the Stern Climate Change review.

• The Government requirement to produce a Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP) which will justify planned expenditure on highways and may have an impact on future funding allocations for highway maintenance.

In order to meet a number of the above key drivers for change the Head of Transport has identified that existing vacancies within the Transport Policy Unit will need to be filled.

1.3 Business Contribution to the Corporate Plan

Transport Services make the following contribution to the Council’s Corporate Plan:-

Business Outcomes Which Contribute To This Priority Corporate Plan • Reducing congestion through LTP and other Priority 1 measures which drive economic and jobs growth Promoting • The development of a well maintained and managed Economic highway infrastructure is essential to the economic Development growth of the City and development of local business opportunities • Removing the impact of traffic congestion, as a constraint on economic growth and the development of alternative modes of transport, including public transport, walking and cycling, to sustain the economic, social and environmental well being of the City • Enhanced business growth and competitiveness through the development of travels plans, by promoting travel behavioural change and through the planning process • A vibrant regional centre that is accessible to all with high quality public realm through the development and implementation of policies and strategies, such as the Regional Centre Transport Strategy. • Well lit highways create a safe environment necessary for promoting economic development • Improved air quality through promoting s ustainable

246 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Business Outcomes Which Contribute To This Priority travel modes Corporate Plan • Education of children through Road Safety training Priority 2 • Promotion of alternative, more sustainable modes of Reaching Full transport, through the travel planning process to Potential in FE/HE sectors and employers, including to the City Education and Council’s own employees Employment • Improving and promoting access to jobs, services and education through sustainable transport and the development and implementation of individualised travel marketing initiatives and community travel plans • Contributing towards the Every Child Matters agenda and the Building Schools for the Future programme through the implementation of Safe Routes to Schools and School Travel Plans, supported and complemented by the Sustainable Modes of Transport Strategy (SMOTS) • Professional, technical and skills training for all employees • Delivering the highway maintenance service mainly through the in-house ‘Contracting Services’ which employs many Manchester residents Corporate Plan • Reducing worklessness through a better Priority 3 understanding of, and improved opportunities to Promoting access, sustainable transport options. To include Individual and consideration of how best to apply Working Neighbour Collective Self Funds to transport. Esteem - Mutual • The provision of a safe public transport system, Respect through closer working with key partners and stakeholders • Reducing crime and disorder through the planning and design process and working with the Police to improve City Centre night-time security • Taking residents’ views into account through consultation, when new highway, traffic, lighting or maintenance schemes are implemented Corporate Plan • Implementation of traffic management, casualty Priority 4 reduction and residents’ parking schemes Creating • Improving reliability of bus services through the Neighbourhoods introduction of Bus Priority Measures of Choice • Improved and expanded walking and cycling routes • Improved accessibility to key services and employment by sustainable transport options • Reduced traffic congestion through the sustained promotion of travel behaviour change and improved public transport provision • Environmental improvements in association with Regeneration Teams

247 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Business Outcomes Which Contribute To This Priority • Attractive, and well lit and maintained highways Corporate Plan • Modernisation of the delivery structures for local Priority 5 transport within Greater Manchester, in line with the Improving Local Transport Act. Council and • Ensuring the modernised transport governance Community arrangements deliver improved outcomes for local Leadership people and enable residents and businesses to play a more active role in shaping future transport • Lead authority for transport matters within Greater Manchester: the City Council will play a key role, working with AGMA and GMPTA/E Corporate Plan • Implementation of the Highway Services SIP Priority 6 • Transfer of service enquiries to the Contact Centre Delivering the (CRM) and developing information and contact with Manchester the public via the new website Improvement • Further development and establishment of the client Programme role and the implementation of the Operator role, continuing to develop the newly established joined-up service for all highway matters leading to better management and investment decisions for Manchester’s highway assets and their contribution to the Council’s Community Strategy. • Embedding the financial management arrangements through SAP Corporate Plan • Learning from good practice in comparable authorities Priority 7 by benchmarking Manchester’s services with those of Continuously other Core Cities Improving Value • Ensuring Value for Money in relation to the quality and For Money price of service delivery by: - Monitoring outcomes from the SIP to achieve more effective and efficient working in delivering highways maintenance and construction works - effective procurement - external challenge and review - a review of premises and other overhead costs • Improving the street lighting stock through the PFI credits the City Council has received • Developing street lighting VFM indicators in conjunction with other PFI authorities • Savings for the City Council through promotion of initiatives included in the Get On Board staff travel plan, such as the Car Club and Cycle to Work scheme Corporate Plan • Preparation of an annual Training Plan for Highway Priority 8 Services based on an assessment of training and Developing Our development needs determined from annual Workforce To appraisals Deliver High • Targeting training for BME staff Quality Services

248 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Business Outcomes Which Contribute To This Priority Quality Services • Delivering a structured workforce that is focused on service delivery as a result of the Highways SIP • Delivering the highest quality service to core areas as a result of the review of the Transport Policy Unit Committee Services and Company Secretariat functions • Deliver cycling and walking priorities and meeting the demands for a more flexible approach to travel planning by reviewing resources in the City and Travel Change teams Corporate Plan • Establishment of a new Customer Care Team Priority 9 • Working with, and being represented at, Ward Co- Ensuring ordination meetings Customer and • Improved methods of consultation and communication Neighbourhood with residents through the Community Engagement Focus, And Strategy Equality of • Ensuring the policy strategy and service’s priorities Opportunity in remains responsive to stakeholders and partners Employment through a range of consultation and engagement and Service mechanisms Provision • Ensuring responsive to stakeholders and partners • A greater understanding of diversity awareness through staff training Corporate Plan • Better monitoring of Finance Reports and Priority 10 Management Action Plans Managing Our • Delivering capital projects in accordance with the Performance Manchester Project Management methodology and Risks to • Comparisons using Key Performance Indicators Ensure We • Improved framework for reporting and monitoring Deliver Our performance of LAA and LTP targets Objectives

249 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Neighbourhood Funding Strategy

While the many requests for Highway Services have been addressed, there are a high number of NFS requests that are a priority within the Community Strategy and Local Area Agreement but it has not been possible to accommodate them within existing resource constraints.

These include converting grass verges into parking bays, introducing residents’ parking schemes, environmental improvements of open space and planting street trees. Resolving these issues would make neighbourhoods more attractive for residents. The provision of pedestrian crossing facilities to local amenities, more 20 mph zones, traffic calming, one way streets and kerb build outs would reduce the intrusion of traffic into residential streets.

More repairs to highway drainage and residential streets and introducing repairs to unadopted roads, footpaths and alleyways would improve local neighbourhoods.

The criteria for Local Transport funding and Area Based Grant funding are being explored to see if it is possible to reallocate funding to cover some of these issues. There are also a number of requests for action which require increased overall funding in order to increase the number of projects delivered within areas of activity (e.g. pedestrian crossings to local amenities and local traffic calming / 20 mph zones), as currently there are many more locations with a higher need than some of the locations were action has been requested. These have been recorded as a capital budget pressure.

1) The following Neighbourhood Funding Strategy proposals have been implemented during the 2008/9 financial year.

NFS Summary of Priority Reference & 80105*DS Removal of yellow lines on Sandal Street and Clayton Brookhill Street Ancoats & 80106*DS Closure of Coleshill Street – restrict access for Clayton travellers. (Varley Street end of Coleshill Street) 80203*BK Improve street lighting at Bow Meadow Grange and Chalcombe Grange, Ardwick 80302*LD Parking and pavement repairs-Provide programme of Highways works and details of joint working with Parkway Green HT Baguley 80303 Tuffley / Greenbrow Road Junction – safer part*DS routes to school Bradford 80411 DB Toucan crossings Ashton Old Road/Holly Street and Midland Street. Off road route Holly Street and Road Brooklands 80510*DS Rd traffic calming study and implementation 80604*DS A pedestrian Crossing at the junction of Errwood

250 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

NFS Summary of Priority Reference Road and Crossley Road 80702 ED Provide strategy for improving quality of new build developments Chorlton 80901*DS Traffic Calming 20mph zones – Chorlton – part Oswald Rd Chorlton 80904*BK Provide strengthened lighting columns to support hanging baskets and banners in the Chorlton District Centre. Chorlton 81002 DB Feasibility study around traffic congestion and part parking problems Give/continue to give support for Festive East Lighting Didsbury 81301*BK West 81409 81503 82102 82201 City Centre 81104*BK Carry out environmental improvements to City Centre and towpaths. Didsbury 81306 Potholes on The Drive and surrounding roads – East Didsbury East – emergency works only done 81702*BK Provide street lighting along footpath and footbridge between Buckley Road and Knutsford Road, Gorton South. MP & NH 82310*BK Ensure the installation of a signal controlled crossing on Road does not slip due to delays in implementing the District Centre Scheme - the crossing shall be installed in 2009 as an early phase of the District Centre works contract subject to NWDA funding for the whole project. MP & NH 82311 Resurfacing Peebles Drive, William Lister Close and part Briscoe Lane Didsbury 81401 Resolve congestion and improve West highway/forecourt environment in Burton Road area of the Ward - a feasibility study was funded in 2008/09. See below for possible implementation*** Gorton South 81703 Resurface unadopted section of Knutsford Road (part)*BK outside school 82903*LD Resurfacing and reconstruction of some part footways and highways - Sharston 83108*LD Abersoch Ave – Withington pavements Will be completed this financial year Woodhouse 82303*ED Black Path, Park part Phase 4B

251 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

252 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

2) The following proposals are being supported through the Neighbourhood Funding Strategy for implementation between April 2009 and March 2012:-

NFS Summary of Priority Reference Ancoats & 80107*DS To implement traffic calming measures on Clayton Bristowe Street – to include Folkstone Road East / Folkstone Road West in scheme. (residents suffering from speeding vehicles - direct impact from North Road scheme) Cheetham 80805*LD Resurfacing works to Smedley Lane at entrance to Hendham Vale - conditions survey required and proposal for works Chorlton 80903*LD Condition of Highways and Footpaths – Cholton - Future two-year programme (2009 to 2011) includes potentially twelve schemes for this ward , subject to funding being available and relevant critical rating compared with other streets throughout MCC. 81205*LD Highway Maintenance – Crumpsall - Future two- year programme (2009 to 2011) includes potentially six schemes for this ward, together with continual preventative maintenance with Micro Asphalt surfacing being considered, subject to funding being available and relevant critical rating compared with other streets throughout MCC. Didsbury 81401*BK Resolve congestion and improve West highway/forecourt environment in Burton Road area of the Didsbury West Ward. A local safety scheme on Burton Road is included in the Highways Capital Programme. *** Public Realm Improvements and a Residents Parking Scheme are subject to Section 106 monies becoming available. Gorton 81603*DS Traffic Management - safety camera North installed Higher 81904*LD East Gardens estate – works as part of Blackley planned regeneration programme

Whalley 83001*DS Safer route to school St Margaret’s RC primary Range part school –Whalley range Withington 83107*LD Pavement renewal Withington part Repairs to footways. Not private forcourts.

253 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

3) The following proposals have NOT been supported through the Neighbourhood Funding Strategy as there are insufficient funds available within the Business Plan period but could be delivered if additional funding was available:

NFS Summary of Priority Reason Reference Longsight 82201 Hector Road Potential scheme for part resurfacing later years but doesn’t meet current critieria Estimated cost £20,000 Ancoats & 80104 Convert grassed verge Housing Services have Clayton on Lingfield Road to advised that they do not allow for parking hold any budget for this provision for local area and are unaware residents (ongoing that they own any issues regarding properties in the parking and use of immediate area. In verge) addition, the Local Transport Capital Programme does not allocate funding for works of this nature. Therefore no funding streams have been identified to replace grass verges with parking bays. Estimated Cost £100,000 Baguley 80303 Greenbrow / This location does not part*DS Hollyhedge Road meet the current criteria Junction – for an improvement Revised scheme. However, a proposals Minor Road Safety Scheme incorporating potential improvements to signage and road markings has been proposed by the Collision Investigation Unit. Estimate Cost £75,000 Bradford 80410*BK Resite traffic island on Doesn’t meet current Clayton Lane, criteria but could meet later year’s Est. cost £100,000 Burnage 80601*DS Arbor Avenue and This request has Abor Drive; 20mph recently been zone and traffic speed considered by the

254 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

NFS Summary of Priority Reason Reference reduction scheme Collision Investigation Unit (2008) but did not meet the current criteria. Estimated cost £50,000 Burnage 80602*DS Extend the 20mph Initial monitoring period zone - Green End will conclude in 2011. Road and Barcicroft Unless any significant Roadand speed safety issues arise reduction scheme between now and 2011 there are no proposals to extend the 20mph scheme or to add physical traffic calming features. Estimated cost £40,000 Burnage 80608*DS For a scheme of Housing Services have parking bays, similar to advised that the long that already in place on stretch of grassed land the other sections of adjacent to the Errwood Road, to be highway/footpath implemented on: remained in Housing Errwood Road ownership following the (Between the junctions transfer of stock to with Shawbrook Road Southways last year. and Woodview Housing is now focusing Avenue, on the West limited funding on the side of the road) on-going maintenance of the land including tree maintenance. Therefore no funding stream has been identified to carry out improvements such as creating parking bays. Estimated Cost £150,000 Cheetham 80802*DS One way system on Not high enough priority Esmond Road for funding when compared to other requests Estimated Cost £40,000 Cheetham 80806*DS Traffic management Does not meet current measures on criteria for traffic calming Woodlands road and measures review of all traffic Estimated cost management schemes £120,000 over the next 5 years.

255 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

NFS Summary of Priority Reason Reference Chorlton 80901*DS Traffic Calming 20mph Unlikely to be included part zones – Chorlton in programme over next 4 schemes 3 years as do not meet criteria for traffic calming. Est. Cost £250,000 Chorlton 81001 DB Maintenance and Does not meet current Park surfacing of criteria. Estimated cost carriageway and £150K footways. Gulley bloackages. Cholrton 81002 DB Traffic calming – Floyd Dependent on 106 and Park Avenue Barlow Hall other funding. Road . Congestion Estimated cost £1 milliion. Road/Mauldeth Road/Hardy Road . Parking Withington Hospital. Signage and road markings, Maitland Avenue, Darley Avenue. Access widening/one way Barlow Terrace. Safety barriers McDonalds to St. Anbrose School. City Centre 81101 Tree Planting, City No resources identified 81102*ED Centre in current year. Estimated cost £60,000 City Centre 81105 DB Review residents Further assessment of parking scheme Resident Parking problem areas to be carried out. Currently no identified funding streams. Estimated cost £200K. Crumpsall 81204*BK New link road between No immediate source of Old Market Street and funding £750k. Crumpsall Vale, Funding via LTP is Crumpsall Ward. unlikely to be justifiable within the next 3 years. Didsbury 81303*LD Field footpath at the Is a definitive footpath East back of Broadoak maintained by highways school - Footpath 224 but not included in next towards Altway 3 years’ programme. Est. cost £20,000

256 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

NFS Summary of Priority Reason Reference Didsbury 81304*LD Field footpath that runs Existing funding cannot East from School Lane support extent of works along to Sandhurst and no alternative Road. funding is available. Est. cost £20,000 Didsbury 81305*LD Ponding on / Recent Civil engineering East Barlow Moor works in this area has Road/Wilmslow Road enabled some of the and by Ballbrook drainage network to now Court. Also ponding flow thus reducing heading towards ponding. Further funding Cheadle near is necessary to address Morningside existing levels of defects. Est. cost £100,000 Didsbury 81308*ED Walling and fencing No resources identified East around Parrswood to fund defects. Triangle Est. cost 80,000 Didsbury 81403*LD Ponding on Palatine Recent Civil engineering West Road works in this area has enabled some of the drainage network to now flow thus reducing ponding. Further funding is necessary to address existing levels of defects Est. cost £100,000 Higher 81904*DS Footpath condition Footway condition done Blackley survey and create as part of routine parking bays on inspections. Blackley Gardens Estate. Est. cost £ 250,000 82001*DS Residents parking - Dependent on S106 Hulme Estimated cost £500,000 MP & NH 82313*ED Tree Planting, Briscoe No resources identified Lane and Scotland Hall in current year. Road, Possible future scheme and Newton Heath Moston 82501*DS Pedestrian crossings – Does not meet current Moston 2No criteria for facility Est. cost £100,000 82601*DS Replace verges with No funding streams car parking facilities available Est. cost £150,000 82704*LD Resurfacing of 5 Although in priority list

257 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

NFS Summary of Priority Reason Reference streets in Old Moat won’t be done for 4/5 years. Est. Cost £150,000 Whalley 83002*LD Drainage – Whalley Recent Civil engineering Range Range works in this area has enabled some of the drainage network to now flow thus reducing ponding. Further funding is necessary to address existing levels of defects. Est. cost £100,000 Whalley 83001*DS Pedestrian safety and Does not meet current Range part parking criteria for highway Several schemes improvement or crossing Est. cost £150,000 Withington 83104*DS Pedestrian crossings – Does not meet current Withington criteria for highway Mauldeth Rd/ improvement or crossing Withington Rd Est. cost £100,000 Withington 83105*DS Pedestrian crossings – Does not meet current Withington criteria for highway Mauldeth Rd/ Egerton improvement or crossing Rd Est. cost £100,000

Withington 83106*DS Traffic lights and Does not meet current pedestrian crossings – criteria for highway Mauldeth Rd/ improvement or crossing Rd Est. cost £100,000 Woodhouse 83204*DS Resident parking No funding available Park scheme Estimated cost £40,000 Woodhouse 82303*ED Black Path, No funds available. Park part Woodhouse Park Estimated cost 4C Phases 4C, 4D and 5 £140K, 4D £105K, Phase 5 £10K. Woodhouse 83205*ED Oldwood Open space, Land ownership issues Park Woodhouse Park – are not resolved and no adoption of the routes resources have been through the open allocated for the current space, lighting of the year. main routes, fencing, Est. cost £200,000 chicanes and landscape improvement

258 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

4:The following proposals have not been supported because they are contrary to policies or Highway prioritisation procedures or could not be delivered in the next 3 years.

NFS Summary of Reason Reference Priority Burnage 80603*BK Reconstruct and Funding via LTP is enhance forecourts unlikely to be justifiable at five shopping Estimated cost parades in the £1,000,000 Burnage Ward. Burnage 80605*DS A pedestrian The above location Crossing near the does not meet the junction of Westcroft current criteria for the Road and Parrs installation of a Wood Road. pedestrian crossing facility and is unlikely to be included within the Local Transport Capital Programme.. Estimated Cost £40,000 Burnage 80606*DS Build-outs to the The above location pavements at the does not meet the junctions of : current criteria for a Kingsway with Highway Improvement Barcicroft Road, scheme including the Westcroft Road, installation of kerbed Southlea Road, build-outs and is Bracicroft Road. unlikely to be included within the Local Transport Capital Programme Estimated cost £50,000 Burnage 80607*LD For the surface of The present funding the alleyway cannot support any between the additional works, and bungalows on Avon no other alternative Road and the source can be found. shopping parade on Burnage Lane to be levelled and resurfaced . Didsbury 81306*LD Resurfacing on The Emergency works East Drive completed. Will not reach critical rating for several years Est. cost £20,000

259 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Didsbury 81402*LD Upgrade field Requires significant West footpath that runs expenditure - funding along the River not available. Mersey Est. cost £40,000 Gorton North 81603*DS Traffic Management Does not meet criteria part Gorton North for highway Several Schemes improvement. Est. cost £350,000 Gorton North 81605 DB Surfacing of gated No fund available for alleys. funding unadopted alleys. Gorton South 81703 Resurface There is no financial (part)*BK unadopted section provision for of Whalley Avenue resurfacing these two and gated alleys unadopted locations rear of Chatham and no links can be Road, Gorton made to other works to South. enable them

Gorton 81705*DS Traffic calming Does not meet criteria South Gorton South for pedestrian crossing Several Schemes and traffic calming. Est. cost £350,000 Longsight 82201*DS Traffic management Opening closed road part Hamilton Road will cause rat running Bankfield Ave Frontagers not the Ashfield Road Council are responsible Unadopted alleyways MP & NH 82312*ED Berry Brow, Miles No resources identified. Platting and Newton Heath. Landscape improvements 82401*LD Passageways – Current funding levels Moss Side unable to support and no alternatives found 82808*DS Resident parking A highway solution is scheme not feasible without business parking being addressed at the same time. This is not achievable within the time span of the Business Plan. Withington 83107*LD Ladybarn Village Unadopted part forecourts - Withington Withington 83109*LD Ladybarn Crescent Unadopted responsibility of

260 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

frontagers

261 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.4 Strategic Risk Analysis This business faces the following strategic risks:- Risk Consequence Risk Ref Rating S1 LTP2 targets are not met Potential reduced funding Med despite investment in key in subsequent years areas S2 Economic recession which Plans are based on Med/High could result in a significant economic growth and slow down in development could be delayed by activity uncertain financial climate. Reduced Section 106 and 278 obligations associated with planning applications, which could impact on the funding and development of sustainable transport initiatives, such as the Car Club S3 Failure to effectively manage Destabilised and High and implement the revised demoralised workforce transport governance resulting in high staff structures arising from the turnover and poor service Local Transport Bill delivery S4 The SIP project does not Service improvements Med deliver: and efficiency savings will • improved customer function be delayed by March 2009 • design and implementation of the Client and Operator functions by December 2009 S5 The Highway Services SIP Poor customer relations Low does not result in improved and services not delivered service delivery efficiently S6 The City Council does not Services would have to be High provide sufficient funding to reduced or there would be cover the cost of street a budget overspend lighting energy S7 Highway Service trading Impact on Chief Exec’s Med account fails to make rate of budgets return

262 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Risk Consequence Risk Ref Rating S8 ‘Spend to Save’ savings are Reduction in accidents High dependent on achieving a may plateau, reducing continuous reduction in the output from programme. cost of accident trip claim Available budgets for payments and defect repairs other areas of highway maintenance would have to be reduced S9 Income levels from external Consequence of not High GMPTA and MPSL charges reviewing GMPTA and insufficient to meet Transport MPSL charges could Policy Unit costs result in an inability to maintain current and future levels of service as a result of the short-fall in resources, which could impact upon the delivery of Community Strategy/LAA priorities S10 Failure to deliver travel Impact upon achievement High behaviour change of LAA targets relating to programme, due to an under congestion, education and resourced team, in the levels of worklessness following key areas: and the possible loss of skilled staff. • Community Strategy / LAA priorities around Waste of pre-2010 worklessness; investment and resources in school travel planning • maximising the benefits of the school travel plan Impact on achieving LAA programme post-2010; targets around congestion and and the number of employers adopting • businesses failing to sustainable travel plans prioritise travel planning

S11 Non delivery of the RCTS Transport network would Med be unable to support sustainable economic growth and an increase in employment opportunities

263 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.5 Customer and Neighbourhood Analysis

The customers for Transport Services are very wide-ranging but can be categorised into three groups:

Residents, Members and Transport/Highway Users Customer Group

From a transport policy perspective this group would include communities, schools with individual stakeholders, (staff, pupils, parents, employees, students etc), District Elected Members, public interest groups and other organisations. The TPU typically provides a range of services for this customer group: advice and support on travel behavioural change; advice and support to elected Members; and support to a range of consultation bodies, such as the Transport Thematic Partnership and the Manchester Cycle Forum.

From a highway perspective, typically this group are concerned about the maintenance of the highway and would approach MCC because there is a pot hole or other small works are required. Residents of Manchester may also want safety improvements on roads where they live.

MCC/Businesses/Transport Operators/Commercial Developers/Utilities Customer Group

A range of work is undertaken by the TPU on behalf of this customer group, including: development and negotiation with Transport Operators; the ongoing development of the Get on Board Travel Plan for MCC staff; and working with businesses and developers (through the planning process) to deliver travel behavioural change.

For Highways work falls into two categories: improvements, such as joining a new development on to an existing carriageway; and maintenance, such as a utility company digging up a road or the requests and approvals for a commercial entities to undertake some sort of work e.g. a skip licence.

Strategic Customer Group

This group of customers drive strategic change. They may be strategic partners with responsibility for such issues as the TIF programme, LTP, transport policy and regeneration. They can also be individual MCC staff members or teams from within the service and other Council services. The work of the TPU underpins this strategic change. For Highways, in the main, these customers would require improvements to the highways (with some being large multi-authority schemes) and management of their requirements will be carried out within the new Client function.

A comprehensive list of the TPU’s customers are set out in Appendix A .

The following key issues are important to the delivery of this business:-

264 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Issue Impact on the Customer / Impact on the Neighbourhood Service Customer surveys Well developed travel plans Resource levels identify how individuals will encourage positive need to be travel to/from their modal shift to more maintained and travel destinations sustainable modes of expanded where (work, school, hospital) transport which will appropriate to meet and what measures contribute towards reduced demands. would encourage congestion, improved air behavioural change. quality and better health. Development and Supporting the development Critical sustainable delivery of the of a sustainable, integrated growth of the City will Regional Centre transport network be severely Transport Strategy. constrained if no TIF funding. Identifying key barriers Inability to access key An individualised within neighbourhoods/ service areas and travel marketing communities to employment has a negative programme would accessing key service impact upon the health and identify this key issue areas and employment well-being of individuals and but would have via transport communities resource implications which would need to be addressed Customer surveys Well maintained highways Available funding generally identify the contribute to sustainable restricts the condition of roads and communities allocation of funds to footpaths as a concern locations where the need is greatest Compliance with DDA Footpaths not complying It is standard requirements with DDA requirements practice that all could disadvantage people structural with disabilities maintenance and highway improvement schemes incorporate DDA requirements Assistance in the Poorly lit and badly The Street Lighting reduction of crime and maintained street lighting PFI addresses disorder are a significant factor in concerns about areas of crime and disorder lighting levels and maintenance issues All highways are to be Poorly maintained highways Regular safety maintained to agreed have a detrimental impact inspection analysis levels of service on the general appearance identifies wards of the physical environment where the needs are greatest

265 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Issue Impact on the Customer / Impact on the Neighbourhood Service Delivery of services to Supports sustainable Requires meet BVPI’s and LTP2 communities and prioritisation of targets in relation to neighbourhoods of choice funding and road safety, highway resources maintenance, congestion management and air quality and accessibility

The business faces the following risks to equality of access to service provision:-

Risk Consequence Risk Rating Ref C1 Funding and Potential exclusion of Med/High resources not communities and individuals targeted at addressing social exclusion e.g. worklessness and NEET C3 Public consultation Public not aware that planned Med may not engage all maintenance works or highway sections of the and traffic schemes are to be community carried out or that there is a lack of awareness of alternative available transport options to access key services and employment. C4 Available funding Increase in insurance claims Low restricts the allocation of funds to locations where the need is greatest

266 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.6 Performance Analysis

The following areas of this business perform well in comparison to established benchmarks:

Performance Measure Comparator Impact on Service Outcomes / Indicator Maintenance: proportion BV223/NI168 of principal, non BV224a/169 principal classified, BV224b Better road maintenance unclassified roads where structural maintenance should be considered Road safety: Child KSI BV99y/NI 4 Safer roads Road safety: Slight BV99z/NI 47 Safer roads casualties Bus, Metrolink, Rail BV 102a,b,c/ More journeys by bus patronage NI 177 Bus satisfaction BV 104 More journeys by bus Mode Share of Journeys LTP4a/198 Reduced congestion to primary school Healthier communities Mode Share of Journeys LTP4b Reduced congestion to secondary school Healthier communities Peak traffic flow to LTP6a Reduced congestion Regional Centre Healthier communities Congestion: Average NI 167 Reduced congestion journey time per person Healthier communities mile on target routes Modal Share to the LTP12a Reduced congestion Regional Centre Healthier communities Increase cycling LTP 3 Index of Reduced congestion recorded cycle Healthier communities counts Reducing NO2 LTP 8 Healthier communities emissions Percentage of National target Congestion; Air Quality; Road Manchester schools to Safety; Accessibility; Quality of have an approved Life; Neighbourhoods of Choice; Travel Plan by 2010 Health and Well Being Number of Manchester Congestion; Air Quality; Road businesses with an Safety; Accessibility; Quality of approved Travel Plan Life; Neighbourhoods of Choice; Health and Well Being

267 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

The following areas of this business perform poorly in comparison to established benchmarks:

Performance Measure Comparator Impact on Service / Indicator Outcomes Road safety: Total KSI BV99x/NI 47 Maintenance: BV187 Percentage of category 1,1a and 2 footways where structural maintenance should be considered

The following key performance issues are successful to the performance of this business:

• Further trend analysis of modal share of non-car use to the regional centre will become available by the beginning of the 2009/10 financial year • Production of a LTP/LAA progress and monitoring report that meets internal deadlines and is to an agreed standard • Development of robust monitoring data to measure modal shift trends • Development and implementation of the Regional Centre Transport Strategy by 2009/10 • Attaining the statutory obligation to develop a travel plan for every school by 2010 • The continued development and implementation of the Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy (SMOTS) • Delivery of city centre signage improvements to budget and within capital gateway business case • Continued development of the Car Club across the city • The achievement of LAA Level 4 indicators • Achieving LTP2 targets • Maintaining the structural condition of the highway which is a major City Council asset • Providing levels of street lighting that comply with current standards

268 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.7 Value for Money Analysis

Service Area / TRANSPORT SERVICES VFM Indicator

The Audit Commission cost comparisons for Transport Policy and Strategy indicate that Manchester is low cost in comparison with nearest neighbours and core cities and is in the bottom quartile in relation to spend per head of population.

Overall Transport Services costs are below average when compared with all relevant comparators. Whilst the service continues to look for opportunities to reduce costs, benchmarking clearly shows that, when compared to Transport Policy Units in other Core Cities with PTA/E structures, Manchester has one of the smallest teams.

Economy The service uses a mixture of in-house resources and external resources which, through competition, ensure costs are reviewed. Most notably, framework contracts have been used successfully to secure professional services and this contract has recently been re-tendered. This new tender incorporated workloads from , and emphasising the Councils’ commitment to working with neighbour authorities and driving down costs, through economies of scale associated with the package of work being let.

The Service Improvement Project has now progressed to detailed design stage with implementation of the Customer function planned by March 2009.

269 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

The Transport Policy Team is delivering on all key LTP indicators. Key challenges for the future stem, not from delivery from current objectives, but from an environment of major externally driven change (see section 1.2)

Road safety indicators are now showing a significant positive improvement. It must be remembered that these represent a percentage reduction in absolute numbers from a base figure derived between 1994 and 1998.

• Manchester is a top performing District of Greater Manchester. We have seen our KSIs fall substantially between 2003/05 and 2005/07. We achieved a 13% fall in KSI casualties since 2003/05 (3 year rolling average). • The three-year average number of KSI casualties for 2006 was 17% below the base. • The three-year average for 2006 for child KSI casualties was 48% below the base. • Slight casualties in 2007 were 27% below the baseline average.

In reality Manchester has seen significant growth in population and in commuters/visitors which would have driven up casualty figures.

The Spend to Save initiative to repair potholes together with increased inspection regimes is now showing significant reductions in trip claim costs. Year Actual trip claim costs

2004/5 £2,207,000 2005/6 £1,911,036 -13.41% 2006/7 £1,649,060 -13.71% 2007/8 £1,211,853 -26.51% Effectiveness The latest 2007/08 figures continues the downward trend, with a reduction of 26.51%.This is in the context that claims settlements lag behind investment by around 18 months.

Many other performance indicators which relate to the effectiveness of the Transport Function are the product of many factors including lifestyle choices about modes of travel or the purchase by the public and businesses of newer cleaner vehicles.

The contribution which the Council can make is therefore potentially at the margins without radical action. As a result the Council is committed to extremely ambitious actions with partner organisations designed to have a significant impact. Extensions to the Metrolink and other investments in public transport infrastructure aim to achieve a shift from car use to more sustainable means of travel but there is a long lead time involved in these investments and the resultant improvement in effectiveness.

Annual School Census figures reveal that 27% of primary and secondary school pupils travel to school by car. This compared with 27.7% in 2007 and is 0.2% below the LTP4 proposed trajectory.

The recent Manchester City Council travel survey for staff based in the city centre revealed that 14% travel into the city by car, this is compared with 22% in 2002.

270

Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Direct officer support to the GMPTA is difficult to benchmark but will be examined as part of the review of transport governance arrangements

Framework contracts are also being used to consider the efficiency of resource utilisation. Examination of these is being used to highlight efficiency issues within the in- house service, most notably the impact which having a shorter working week has on productivity and on overhead costs.

In relation to road safety measures, systems are in place to identify potential schemes on a locality by locality Efficiency basis assessed against information about casualties. These schemes are then prioritised on the basis of those schemes which will have the biggest impacts given the level of resources required.

The street lighting PFI has delivered the fewest possible lighting columns necessary to deliver the required level of street lighting. The Capital investment required and the long term energy efficiency benefits which are being delivered would not have been possible without progressing this initiative.

The Service Improvement Project has identified that it will be possible to make efficiency savings.

As has already been flagged up, there is an urgent need to fill vacancies to strengthen the Transport Policy team to meet strategic, sub-regional and local drivers for change (see section 1.2)

Action to reduce Review Transport Policy income levels from external costs / improve charging outcomes

The service is actively engaged in promoting initiatives through the Get On Board Travel Plan, such as the Car Club and Cycle to Work scheme, which will lead to the realisation of savings for the City Council

271 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.8 Workforce Analysis

The following issues / factors are drivers for workforce change in this business, the timescales are all short term until the outcome of the SIP restructure and the implications of the Local Transport Act are known.

Driver for Change Change(s) Needed in the Timescale Business Delivering the aspiration Ensure appropriate levels of 2009/10 of the Community resources are allocated, including Strategy/LAA by ensuring the filling of existing vacancies, that transport plays a key within the Transport Policy Unit to role in tackling social deliver this key agenda. Changes in exclusion and deprivation the workforce include adopting a more flexible, efficient approach to travel planning and the development of innovative travel planning techniques and concepts.

Delivery of Manchester’s Ensure appropriate levels of 2009 key priorities around resources are allocated, including Metrolink Phase 3a and the filling of existing vacancies, the RCTS within the Transport Policy Unit, to meet these key priorities. Changing demands on Greater prioritisation of current 2009 the Committee and focus and resources to meet these Company Secretariat changes. Support to the GMPTA function will be realigned to take into account the governance arrangements arising from the Local Transport Bill.

Local Transport Act and Consider any changes required to 2009 revised city region respond to provisions of the Act and transport governance changes to delivery at AGMA level arrangements Traffic Management Act Restructure network management 2009 requiring a dedicated function team SIP restructuring Clear identification of a client role 2009 proposals and service providers to deliver network management, improvement and maintenance functions Improved management of Review performance monitoring 2009 Street Lighting PFI arrangements and client team priorities now that the initial asset replacement programme is completed.

272 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Market Forces Ensure staff are well motivated, 2009 have interesting work and receive an appropriate remuneration/ working conditions package Retirement of Senior Implement a succession plan 2009 Managers

273 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.9 Financial Drivers and Considerations

The business has a cash limit budget in 2008/9 that is split between the Chief Executive’s department and the former Technical Services.

Chief Executive’s current cash limit is £2,070,000 and an initial planning target has been set for the next three years of:

2009/10 £2,047,000 2010/11 £2,060,000 2011/12 £2,041,000

Technical Services cash limit is £12,147,000 and an initial planning target has been set for the next three years of:

2009/10 £11,724,000 2010/11 £11,839,000 2011/12 £11,750,000

Savings targets have been set for the Chief Executive’s department of

2009/10 £70,000 2010/11 £30,000 2011/12 £62,000

And for Technical Services of:

2009/10 £696,000 2010/11 £149,000 2011/12 £355,000

In addition the following planned efficiencies and savings were identified within the business plan 2008/9 to 2009/10:-

Ref Planned Efficiency / Amount (£) Risk Saving 2009/10 2010/11 Rating E1 Unachievable planned £350,000 savings identified in 2007/08.

These savings are no longer considered achievable as they relied on alternative project delivery arrangements being introduced via Manchester Contracts. These have been delayed and are subject to further discussions.

In view of the budget pressures listed below and the efficiencies already accounted for within the Highways Service Improvement Project, it is not feasible to deliver alternative savings without reducing the level of services and staffing in areas that are already the subject of budget pressures and unfulfilled neighbourhood funding strategy requests.

274 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

The bottom line mainstream cash limit budget requirement for the business therefore remains as per the initial planning targets

Budget Pressures

Ref Budget Pressure Profile (£) Possible Impact on Risk source of Customers / Rating funding Stakeholders 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

BP02 Street Lighting 480,000 504,000 525,000 Budget Overspend H Energy Demand BP03 Accident Trip 80,000 84,000 88,000 Budget Overspend H Claims and Repairs BP04 Highways 150,000 125,000 100,000 Income from Reduced future H Development Developers income and loss of Control Income local improvements BP05 Traffic Engineering 90,000 90,000 90,000 Revenue Inadequate H Service Requests funding responses to public virement & Member requests BP06 Highway & Traffic 110,000 110,000 0 Efficiency Inadequate control of H client management savings in service future years improvements

In addition to the revenue budget pressures recorded above there is a £4M capital budget pressure to deliver all of the proposals in section 3 of the Neighbourhood Funding Strategy.

275 Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

1.10 Partnerships, Key Linkages and Cross Cutting Issues

The following partnerships, linkages and cross cutting issues are important to the success of this business:-

• Framework consultants and contractors as they affect the quality and timing of scheme delivery • Area Regeneration Teams as we need to co-ordinate investment in Regeneration Areas • Transport Thematic Partnership, a consultative group of transport users • Transport operators as they are users of the highway infrastructure • GMPTA/PTE as they manage public transport • AGMA as the regional policy making body • Lighting PFI contractor as they deliver the lighting maintenance services in the City • 4NW (formerly the NW Regional Assembly) • NWDA • NW Centre of Excellence for advice in relation to procurement • Ward Representatives and Co-ordinators as they are the link with the local communities • Corporate procurement as they are overseeing policy in relation to procurement of delivery partners • Manchester Cycle Forum: a consultative for cycle users in the city • Trafford and Manchester Partnership (): Travel planning forum for major employers in the two districts • Hospital Travel Plan Partnership: Travel planning partnership for health organisations • City Centre Management Company (Cityco) • School Travel Working Group • Manchester City Council Travel Plan Steering Group • Higher Education Precinct • New East Manchester • Group • Internal departments • City South Partnership • Greater Manchester Travel Co-ordinators’ Group • Greater Manchester School Travel Working Group • Metroshuttle Working Group • City Centre Bus Forum

1.11 Business Continuity

Currently the service is not defined as Priority 1 or Priority 2, however a full review of business continuity planning will be carried out as part of the Client function in the current Highway Service, Service Improvement Plan.

- 276 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Section 2: Business Objectives and Performance Measures

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities REDUCE CONGESTION AND PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL T1 Improve the capacity of Measures will need to be 2004/5 High 1,3,4,5 public transport and established once a funding manage congestion strategy to replace TIF has been put in place. LTP 5 LTP 7 73% Gtr. Mcr. Index 85% figures LTP 10a 100 Index10 42% 0 66% T2 Increase modal shift a) LPSA2 target of a 4 61% 65% Med 1,4 from car use to public percentage point increase 2005/06 LTP transport, cycling and in the proportion of trips Target walking by targeting made by means other than funding to appropriate the private car to the schemes Regional Centre, crossing a cordon on the inside of the inner in the morning peak (7.30 to 9.30 am) LTP 12a

- 277 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities b) No increase in peak 2005 30779 vehicle trips to Regional Centre (LTP 6a) 30779 c) Increase cycle flows by 6% 2006 106 Gtr Mcr (LTP 3) Index figures 100 d) Increase in non car use of 2006 58 Gtr Mcr 2% to primary schools (LTP Figures 4a) 56 LPSA 2 target. No further reduction in use of non-car transport to secondary schools (LTP 4b) 80 80 e) Limit decline in walking 2004 Gtr Mcr trips to 5% figures (LTP 11) 249 237 T3 New bus priority Implement a programme of 2008 Med 1,4 measures bus priority measures LTP 1a 85% 85% Gtr Mcr LTP 1b 90% 90% figures LTP 10b TBC

- 278 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities REDUCE CASUALTIES T4 Reduce casualties a) 50% reduction in KSI by 1994/98 -41.7% -50% ? Med 2,4 from road accidents by 2010 compared to average targeting expenditure 1994/98 (BVPI 99a iii, and travel planning at LTP2) hot spots and in the vicinity of schools

b) Safe Routes to Schools 2006 85 95 Low 2 programme allied to the number of schools with adopted travel plans IMPROVE AIR QUALITY T5 Improve Air Quality a) Air Quality 2005 Med 4 Reduce NOx emissions Reducing the adverse from impact of transport, in Traffic by 39% 36.71 29.00 terms of climate LTP8 change and, environmental degradation b) Climate Change. 2005 Med 4 Limit increase in CO2 20103 emissions to 4.5% 20053.76 m Gtr Mcr LTP 9 m tonnes tonnes figures

- 279 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY VIA TRANSPORT T6 Number of Travel Plans 2007/08 164 193 Med 2 being developed and implemented in schools 129 Number of workplaces and 2007/08 87 100 115 Med 1, 2, 9 other organisations with Travel Plans 75 T7 Improve access to Reducing levels of Further development of the performance management sustainable transport worklessness framework for these objectives will be undertaken. T8 Reducing the adverse Secure safe and efficient impact of transport, in access between residential terms of safety areas and key destinations, hazards, residential including centres of amenity and social employment, schools, shops exclusion and other services

- 280 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities The following Indicators are specifically linked to performance management in Highway Services HIGHWAYS SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME

H1 Savings To achieve £1.5m savings by £350k £490k 6,7,8 2009/10 (£1m capital 2007/08 capital capital High £0.5 revenue) £150k £350k revenu revenue £160k capital needs to have e been achieved in 2007/08

H2 Increase in customer % increase in customer TBC TBC TBC TBC ? 6,7,8 satisfaction satisfaction a) All customers accessing the service via EoC

b) Developers accessing the TBC TBC TBC TBC ? 6,7,8 service via meetings

c) Residents/businesses via TBC TBC TBC TBC ? 6,7,8 the annual ward survey

H3 Reduction in overall % reduction in overall project Has Assess M 6,7,8,10 project design cost design cost Barchha Mar to supply 2010

- 281 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities

H4 Schemes delivered to % of schemes delivered to Has Assess M 6,7,8,10 targeted completion targeted completion date Barchha Mar date to supply 2010 Assess H5 Improved Customer No of days query is EOC to Mar M 6,7,8,10 response times progressed from enquiry, to supply 2010 resolution.

CUSTOMER CARE

H6 % of complaints answered 100% 96% M 6,7,8,10 Improved Customer within 15 working days June 08 H7 response times % of letters answered within 89% 93% M 6,7,8,10 10 days June 08 HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE H9 BV 223 - Proportion of 37.5 9% ? 3,7,8 principal roads where (2004/5) structural maintenance should be considered Improved structural LAA / NI168 / LTP

- 282 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities H10 maintenance BV224a – Proportion of non- 12% 12% ? 3,7,8 principal classified roads (2005/6) where structural maintenance should be considered LAA / NI169 / LTP ROAD SAFETY H10a Improve Road safety BV99 Road Safety – 2 by reducing the a)Total KSI 147 73 L number of people (1994/8) Killed or Seriously LAA / NI 47 / LTP H10b Injured 2 b) Children KSI 32 17 L (1994/8) LAA / NI 47 / LTP H10c 2 c) slight casualties 2350 1645 L CYCLING H11 Increase number of LTP 3 – Cycling: Index of GM – GM – ? 4 journeys undertaken recorded cycle counts 05/06 10/11 by cycle ACC ACC Index index 100 106 MODE SHARE

- 283 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities H12a Travel change LTP 4a – Mode share 2,4 journeys to primary school ? Number of Children walking/ cycling to school. LAA Level 4 GM – GM – indicator for Full Education 2003/4 2010/11 and employment potential 56% by 58% by H12b LTP 4b – Mode share non car non car 2,4 journeys to secondary modes modes schools 80% by 80% by LAA / NI198/ LTP non car non car ? LAA Level 4 indicator modes modes Sustainable Economic Growth H12c Travel change LTP12 60.5% 65% ? 4 a) Mode Share to Regional (2005) Centre % of journeys by mode other than private car LTP LAA Level 2 indicator Sustainable Economic Growth Multi Area Agreement KPI 7

- 284 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities CONGESTION H13 LTP6 – Peak Traffic flows to 2005 34778 ? 1,3,4,5 regional centre 34778 H14 Reduce Congestion LTP7 – Congestion. Average GM - 100 4.64 4.62 ? 1,3,4,5 journey time per person mile index mins mins on target routes 4.62mins (2003/4) LAA / NI167 / LTP Indicator. 4.67 Level 2 indicator Sustainable Mins Economic Growth 2008) Key LAA link to MAA KPI 7

WALKING H15 LTP11 – Walking. No GM – 237 ? 1,2,4,5 trips/year/person where 249 trips/ walking is the main mode Person (2004) LTP indicator based on national Travel Survey data. STREET LIGHTING

- 285 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities H16 The average number of 4.73 4.63 4.63 4.63 ? 1,4,7 calendar days taken to repair (Sep 08) Min Min Min a street lighting fault, which is levels levels in levels in under the control of the local in PFI PFI PFI authority contract contract contract

H17 The average number of 25.39 32.5 32.5 32.5 ? 1,4,7 Improve community calendar days taken to repair (Sep 08) Min Min Min safety a street lighting fault, where levels levels in levels in Improve road safety response time is under the in PFI PFI PFI control of a DNO contract contract contract

H18 Percentage of street lights 99.04 Min Min Min ? 1,4,7 working (Sep 08) levels levels in levels in in PFI PFI PFI contract contract contract H19 Percentage of signs and 98.56 Min Min Min ? 1,4,7 bollards working (Sep 08) levels levels in levels in in PFI PFI PFI contract contract contract BRIDGE CONDITION H20 ? Bridge Condition Indices TBC with ? 7 Colin Firth

- 286 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Contribution Target Performance to the Baseline Risk Objective Performance Measure Corporate (date) Rating Ref 2009/10 2009/11 2010/11 Plan Priorities H21 ? Number of structures failing to TBC with ? 7 achieve 40t weight limit. Colin Firth

- 287 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Section 3: Operational Plan

3.1 Financial Plan - Transport

Current Cash New Proposed Gross Cash Budget Limit Revenue Budget Funding Capital Limit Revenue Budgets Funding Investment Budget Required? Ref Objective / Budget Headline 2009/10 2010/11 20011/12 2009/10 2010/11 20011/12 Gross Net Source (Y/N) (£000) (£000 (£000) (£000) (£000 (£000)

Costs excluding budget pressures and savings: Transport Policy 991 244 1,015 1,040 1,065 Mainstream 264 284 304 N Income 751 756 761 Metroshuttle 333 0 340 347 354 0 0 0 N Income 340 347 354 Traffic:- Highways Management 68 68 69 71 72 Mainstream 69 71 72 N Highways Infrastructure / Network 626 429 639 652 665 Mainstream 442 455 468 N Income 197 197 197 Road Safety & Highways DC 223 223 228 232 237 Mainstream 228 232 237 N Road Safety Education 358 329 366 375 385 Mainstream 337 346 356 N Income 29 29 29 Bridge Design 150 135 153 156 160 Mainstream 138 141 145 N Income 15 15 15 School Crossing Patrollers 642 642 658 674 691 Mainstream 658 674 691 N MEDC 8,369 0 8,369 8,369 8,369 0 0 0 N Income 8,369 8,369 8,369

- 288 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Transport Thematic Partnership 938 0 872 872 0 WNF 872 872

Savings to be identified (70) (100) (162) (70) (100) (162) Inflation readjustment (19) (43) (70) (19) (43) (70)

Target Totals 12,698 2,070 12,620 12,598 11,766 12,709 12,745 11,998 Total Mainstream Funding Required 2,047 2,060 2,041

- 289 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Financial Plan - Engineering Services

Current Cash New Proposed Gross Cash Budget Capital Objective / Budget Limit Revenue Budget Funding Ref Limit Revenue Budgets Funding Investment Headline Budget Required? Gross Net 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Source 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 (Y/N) £000,s £000,s £000,s £000,s £000,s £000,s £000,s £000,s O1 Highway Maintenance 6,119 4,755 6,257 6,397 6,541 User Income 1,395 1,426 1,458 N Mainstream 4,862 4,971 5,083

O2 Street Lighting 8,206 4,990 8,391 8,579 8,772 User Income 0 0 0 N Grants 3,288 3,362 3,438 Mainstream 5,102 5,217 5,334

O3 Accident Trips 1,638 1,638 1,675 1,713 1,751 User Income 0 0 0 N Mainstream 1,675 1,713 1,751

O4 DRM/CRM 115 115 118 120 123 User Income 0 0 0 N Mainstream 118 120 123

O5 Departmental Support 649 649 664 679 694 User Income 0 0 0 N Mainstream 664 679 694

Totals 16,727 12,147 17,103 17,488 17,882 17,103 17,488 17,882 Total Mainstream Funding Required 12,420 12,700 12,986

- 290 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Budget Pressures (also listed in Section 1.9)

Ref Budget Pressure Profile (£) Possible source of Impact on Customers / Risk funding Stakeholders Rating 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12

BP02 Street Lighting Energy 480,000 504,000 525,000 Budget Overspend H Demand BP03 Accident Trip Claims and 80,000 84,000 88,000 Budget Overspend H Repairs BP04 Highways Development 150,000 125,000 100,000 Income from Reduced future income and H Control Income Developers loss of local improvements BP05 Traffic Engineering Service 90,000 90,000 90,000 Revenue funding Inadequate responses to H Requests virement public & Member requests BP06 Highway & Traffic client 110,000 110,000 0 Efficiency savings in Inadequate control of service H management future years improvements

- 291 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Details Of Potential Revenue Consequences Of Capital Investment Currently Included In The Capital Programme

First full year Rev. Capital Amounts approved in Capital First Years Revenue Main Service Area / Revenue impact progr- Programme Consequences Capital Scheme Corporate Objective Consequences included ammme (Budget Headline) 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 Amount Year Amount Year in plan? Ref. No. £’000 £’000 £’000 £’000 £’000 Y/N

- 292 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Details Of Potential Capital Investment Currently In The Gateway Process But Not Yet Included In The Capital Programme

Potential Will this be Impact on subject to a Revenue Justification for investment capital bid for Stage of CPG Main Service Area / Costs (for Description of (e.g. Service Need, Statutory Requirement, 200/8/9 to Gateway Ref. Corporate Objective proposals investment VFM, to further council objectives) 2010/11 Process No. (Budget Headline) that will be programme subject to (Y/N) bids) Ranking Explanation

Ranking : Potential impact: 1 Crucial to continuation of the service 1 Will increase revenue costs within planning period 2 Essential to achievement of the Business Plan 2 Will increase revenue costs but outside planning period 3 Supports the achievement of the Business Plan 3 Will reduce revenue costs within planning period 4 Will reduce revenue costs but outside planning period 5 Will increase income within planning period 6 Will increase income but outside planning period

- 293 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Detailed Proposals On Income From Charges For Service

Current Estimated Income Reason Current Proposed Charges Charge / Income Budget Income 2009/10 20010/11 2011/12 for Charge 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 £’000 £’000 £’000 £’000 increase £.p. £.p. £.p. £.p. Transport Policy GMPTA* 437 450 463 477 1 437 450 463 477 MPSL+ 100 105 110 115 100 105 110 115 Lump sum charges

Reason for increase/decrease should *Assumed increase at 3 per cent per annum after 2009/10. Subject to discussion GMPTE show: +Allowed increase to reflect no real increase for several years. 1 Change in charges 2 Change in activity 3 Both

- 294 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Neighbourhood Funding Strategy Proposals - see Section 1.3 for full details of the proposals

Proposal Benefits To Residents Reasons Why This Options For Future Strategy Director And Cannot Be Addressed Resourcing Executive Member Through Existing Approval Resource Allocation Yes / No

Do we submit a proposals for £1M capital a year for two years (to end of LTP2 period ?)

- 295 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

3.2 Work Force Plan

The work force of this business comprises the following:-

The Transport Policy Unit is a multi-disciplined team containing staff with a mix of experience and qualifications including policy analysts, engineers/planners and administrators. The Unit consists of four core teams – Travel Change Team, City Team, Committee Team and the GMPTA Policy Team – Its strength lies in its ability to respond to a wide range of different agendas and in providing a flexible, analytical and administrative capability to both the City Council and the Passenger Transport Authority.

Highway Services, through MEDC, provides the professional engineering services in relation to traffic management, highway design, bridge engineering, landscape and specialist related services. The majority of the staff are academically and professionally qualified in the appropriate disciplines. A key feature is the delivery of projects in an effective and efficient manner and within financial targets set. The staff group is well motivated and has a culture of service delivery.

Through Technical Services, Highway Services’ staff have responsibility for maintaining the adopted highway network, managing activities and events on or affecting the highway, including works carried out by Utility Companies and contractors, monitoring the performance of the street lighting service provider (Amey) and other related services. The make up of the staff includes those who are academically and professionally qualified, plus those who have been trained and are skilled in their particular disciplines. The staff are well motivated and have acquired the necessary skills in dealing with the public to deliver high quality services.

Highway Services also covers the Road Safety and School Crossing Patrol Service. In terms of Road Safety a team of administrative and training officers provide road safety advice and training mainly to young people within Manchester, through the schools. In addition, they promote regional and national safety campaigns to all highway users. The School Crossing Patrol (SCP) service is provided by a small team of full-time supervisors and a much larger number of part-time patrols, who operate from individual sites for an hour each morning and afternoon. Some of these staff also participate in specific safety initiatives within ‘their’ schools. The SCP service is provided to coincide with school term times, whereas the safety education training is an all year round activity.

This section excludes details of development issues for GMUTC and GMTU staff.

- 296 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Highway Services is currently the subject of a Service Improvement Project which is in the detail design and implementation phase. Highway Services will be reorganised into three key areas:

● Customer ● Client (Manager) ● Contractor (Operator)

Implementation of Phases 1 and 2 of the SIP will ensure that service is customer focused and has a sound Client function. This will develop further as the project moves through to Phase 3 – final design of the client and operator functions followed by implementation to ensure project work is delivered efficiently and effectively in accordance with corporate priorities. .

The restructuring of the Highway Services workforce will have an impact on the way projects are managed and delivered. In advance of the SIP multi-disciplined design teams have been created for the highways capital programme minor schemes. Staff are now expected to work more flexibly rather than in defined ‘professional’ groups.

This Workforce Plan supports the strategic aims of the corporate Pay and Workforce Strategy 2005/08 which are to create a workforce that is:

● highly motivated with the skills needed for delivery ● working together as “Team Manchester” ● customer focussed ● continuously striving to improve and ● providing leadership within communities and partners

- 297 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Work force statistics:

Transport Policy Engineering Services AGMA Units Technical Services Total number of staff: 416

Equality Data (includes SCP staff):

40% over 55 years old 41% female employees 9% BME employees 4% disabled employees

Labour turnover and number of days lost :

18% labour turnover in Chief Executive’s Dept 10.5 average number of sick days per employee in Chief Executive’s Dept 14.7 average number of days lost in Transport Services

Engineering Services also monitors uncertified sickness absence as part of its Flexible Working Scheme and this is 2.2 days per employee.

Sickness targets:

09/10 8.7 days 10/11 7.6 days

- 298 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

The drivers for work force change in this Business are (the timescales are all short term until the outcome of the TIF bid and the SIP restructure are known):

Driver for Change Change(s) Needed in the Business Timescale Delivering the aspiration Ensure appropriate levels of resources are allocated, 2009/10 of the Community Strategy/LAA by including the filling of existing vacancies, within the ensuring that transport plays a key Transport Policy Unit to deliver this key agenda. role in tackling social exclusion and Changes in the workforce include adopting a more deprivation flexible, efficient approach to travel planning and the development of innovative travel planning techniques and concepts. Delivery of Manchester’s key priorities Ensure appropriate levels of resources are allocated, 2009 around Metrolink Phase 3a and the including the filling of existing vacancies, within the RCTS Transport Policy Unit to meet these key priorities. Changing demands on the Committee Greater prioritisation of current focus and resources 2009 and Company Secretariat function to meet these changes. Support to the GMPTA will be realigned to take into account the governance arrangements arising from the Local Transport Bill.

Local Transport Act and revised city Consider any changes required to respond to 2009 region transport governance provisions of the Act and changes to delivery at arrangements AGMA level Traffic Management Act requiring a Restructure network management function 2009 dedicated team SIP restructuring proposals Clear identification of a client role and service 2009 providers to deliver network management, improvement and maintenance functions Improved management of Street Review performance monitoring arrangements and 2009 Lighting PFI client team priorities now that the initial asset replacement programme is completed.

- 299 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Market Forces Ensure staff are well motivated, have interesting work 2009 and receive an appropriate remuneration/ working conditions package Retirement of Senior Managers Implement a succession plan 2009

Over three years the work force in this business will change as follows:-

The Work Force as at March 2012 What workforce will be needed to deliver the service model Describe the gap to be addressed between the workforce as at 1 predicted as at 31 March 2012 – numbers, types of staff, skills, April 2009 and the workforce as at 31 March 2012, numbers, competencies types of staff, skills, competencies

The workforce plan will need to be reviewed in the event of the All Transport Policy Unit teams will seek to assess the proposed transport governance reforms. requirements needed to maintain current and future high levels of service delivery. Identifying any gaps will inform the type of staff, skills, competencies and numbers required as at 31 March 2012. Highways Services will undergo fundamental change as part of A post SIP review will inform the type of staff, skills, the SIP. competencies and numbers required as at 31 March 2012.

- 300 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

The Work Force as at March 2010 What workforce will be needed to deliver the service model Describe the gap to be addressed between the workforce as at 1 predicted as at 31 March 2010 – numbers, types of staff, skills, April 2009 and the workforce as at 31 March 2010, numbers, types competencies of staff, skills, competencies

Additional pressures will be placed on the Transport Policy Unit to Currently there is a team of 4 Travel Planners (2x School Travel deliver the aspirations and priorities of the Community Planners; 1 x Workplace Travel Planner; 1 x Joint Strategy/LAA, in order to ensure that transport plays a key role in School/Workplace Travel Planner) with 0.5fte administrative tackling social exclusion and deprivation. In order to deliver this support, under the leadership of the Travel Change Team Leader. challenge the Travel Change Team will need to consist of A vacancy gap exists in this small team. Between 1 April 2009 and individuals proficient in the skills and competencies required to 31 March 2010 each member of the team will acquire, through a deliver the wider applications of travel planning, including mentoring programme, complementary skills allowing for the community travel plans, individualised travel marketing and seamless transition between travel planning disciplines and give independent travel training. The current Travel Change Team opportunities for career progression. Existing vacancies are levels will need to be augmented through filling of existing impacting on the team’s output and this gap is to be addressed. In vacancies, amounting to 1.5 fte. addition, existing vacancies in the team are to be filled, as the drivers for change, as identified earlier, will otherwise place significant burden on this small team.

Poor transport, including perception of poor transport, can be viewed as a barrier to people in deprived communities accessing key opportunities and services. In order to address this challenge innovative travel planning techniques and programmes, such as community travel planning; individualised travel marketing and independent travel training will need to be developed and implemented. Recent analysis of the Travel Change Team has identified a need for additional skills, training and resources in order to deliver this agenda. It also is proposed that bids will be submitted for WNF funding to support bespoke projects.

- 301 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

- 302 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

In order to deliver Manchester’s key priorities around Metrolink The Transport Policy City Team consists of the City Team Leader Phase 3a and the RCTS, it is envisaged that the current team will and a Principal Policy Officer. A vacancy gap does not allow this have been augmented through the filling of existing vacancies small team to address the core objectives of the LAA, for example amounting to 1.5fte. walking policy/strategy, cycling policy/strategy, working with regeneration teams on the development of local plans, developing AGMA’s strategic approach to corridor partnerships and examining the opportunities that transport offers in tackling worklessness.

A full assessment of current staffing and service levels of the The Transport Policy Unit’s Committee Team provides Committee Committee Team will be undertaken as part of the review support to the Passenger Transport Authority and a Company Secretarial function to key partners. A review of both functions will be undertaken during 2009 with a view to prioritising future work and improving service levels, productivity and exploring opportunities for future revenue generation. A key objective will be to facilitate career progression between the teams within the transport policy unit wherever possible.

Client and Operator in Highway Services It is anticipated that Resources and skills will need to be developed or acquired in the following areas to support the customer and The development of specific customer and client functions will client functions:- Customer Relationship Management, require staff to develop / enhance their skills and competencies in Partnership Working, Customer Service, Client Contract and these areas. Supplier Management, Programme Management, Project Management, Organisational Performance Management, Report Writing, brief Writing, Business Analysis, Information & Data Management. Policy writing, change management, staff development.

The creation of the operator to fulfil the network management, It is anticipated that resources and skills will need to be developed improvement and maintenance functions will require staff to or acquired in the following areas to support the operator maintain /enhance their technical skills and ability to operate in a functions:- Change management, skill sharing, staff development, more flexible operational environment. Financial management, Customer Service, Sustainable development, specific Technical training. - 303 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Workforce development Objective - Transport policy Responsibility Timescale Fill existing vacancies Stephen Clark 31 March 2010 (Dave Whyte/Richard Develop a flexible Travel Change Team capable of delivering a comprehensive Lovell) travel behaviour change programme, including contributing to tackling worklessness and the NEET agenda and the continuation of the school travel planning programme post 2010. Fill existing vacancies Stephen Clark 31 March 2010 (Dave Whyte) Enable the Transport Policy City Team to address in greater depth a number of workstreams which contribute towards achieving the core objectives of the LAA.

Deliver the highest quality Committee and Company Secretarial service to core Stephen Clark 31 March 2010 areas. (Terry Bowers)

Identify career progression opportunities across the TPU wherever possible.

Workforce development Objective - Highway Services Responsibility Timescale Design & Implement a programme of change management as part of the SIP to Chris Barber 31 March 2010 enable staff to develop and enhance their skills and competencies to meet the requirements of the new SIP structure (customer, client and operator roles).

- 304 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

3.3 Business Risk Register

BUSINESS PLAN RISK ASSESSMENT - CONSEQUENCE AND LIKELIHOOD ANALYSIS

Consequence Risk Rating Ref Risk Description Ratin Controls Description Likelihood Impact g Strategic Risks to the Business S1 LTP2 targets are not met Potential reduced funding in subsequent 2 2 4 Corporate and divisional despite investment in key areas years programme management systems S2 Economic recession which Plans are based on economic growth and 2 3 6 Control any delays could result in a significant slow could be delayed by uncertain financial down in development activity climate. Reduced Section 106 and 278 obligations associated with planning applications, which could impact on the funding and development of sustainable transport initiatives, such as the Car Club S3 Failure to effectively manage Destabilised and demoralised workforce 2 3 4 Effective management and implement the revised resulting in high staff turnover and poor transport governance structures service delivery arising from the Local Transport Act S4 The SIP project does not Service improvements and efficiency 2 2 4 Management SIP Team deliver: savings will be delayed • improved customer function Poor customer relations and services not by March 2009 delivered efficiently • design and implementation of the Client and Operator

- 305 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Risk Rating functions by December 2009 S5 The Highway Services SIP Poor customer relations and services not 1 3 3 Management SIP Team does not result in improved delivered efficiently service delivery S6 The City Council does not Services would have to be reduced or 2 3 6 No effective control provide sufficient funding to there would be a budget overspend other than competition cover the cost of street lighting between electricity energy suppliers

S7 Highway Service trading Impact on Chief Exec’s budgets 2 2 4 Monthly financial account fails to make rate of monitoring and on-line return time management system S8 ‘Spend to Save’ savings are Reduction in accidents may plateau, 2 3 6 Monthly budget dependent on achieving a reducing output from programme. monitoring continuous reduction in the cost Available budgets for other areas of of accident trip claim payments highway maintenance would have to be and defect repairs reduced S9 Income levels from external Consequence of not reviewing GMPTA 2 3 6 Review income levels GMPTA and MPSL charges and MPSL charges could result in an Monthly monitoring insufficient to meet Transport inability to maintain current and future Policy Unit costs levels of service as a result of the short- fall in resources, which could impact upon the delivery of Community Strategy/LAA priorities S10 Failure to deliver travel Impact upon achievement of LAA targets 2 3 6 Review resource levels behaviour change programme, relating to congestion, education and Monthly monitoring due to an under resourced levels of worklessness and the possible team, in the following key areas loss of skilled staff.

- 306 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Risk Rating

• maximising the benefits of Waste of pre-2010 investment and the school travel plan resources in school travel planning programme post-2010; • Community Strategy / LAA Impact on achieving LAA targets around priorities around congestion and the number of employers worklessness; and adopting sustainable travel plans • businesses failing to prioritise travel planning :

S11 Non delivery of the of the RCTS Transport network would be unable to 2 2 4 Review resource levels support sustainable economic growth and Monthly monitoring an increase in employment opportunities

Additional risks

Gateway approvals to enable orders to be placed not available until July (as this year) plus the no PO, no pay policy reduces expenditure and outcomes in 2009/10.

Traffic regulation order and consultation timescales continue to reduce progress on capital schemes.

Solutions include a three year running programme so that year end is less of a major issue, improved approval processes, better procedures for TROs and consultations.

- 307 - Manchester City Council Item 7, Appendix 4 Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee 6 January 2009

Appendix A – Transport Policy Unit (Customers, Partners and Stakeholders)

Travel Change Team Committee Team City Team PTA Policy Team Schools (Heads, pupils, Elected Members (GMPTA, Elected Members (inc. Exec Clerk to the GMPTA Governing bodies, staff, MCC and 10 districts) Members) parents) Businesses and employees Senior officers Chief Executive and senior PTE officers (PTA/PTE/MCC/Districts) officers Other organisations inc. Public (inc. interest groups) Internal Council departments 10 District authorities FE/HE, hospitals etc Residents (residential External clients (inc. LSP, Other districts City region bodies inc. AGMA developments) MAG, Millennium Quarter Trust, Concert Hall, NEM) Communities GMPTA/E GMPTE DfT Developers Internal clients (Cycle Forum, Urban Regeneration GONW departmental working groups) Companies MCC employees Public transport operators Elected Members (GMPTA, MCC and 10 districts) Internal Council partners (inc. GONW/RDA Regeneration agencies: Engineers, Children’s MIDAS, Manchester Enterprise Services, Planning) External Partners (inc. Bike Public (inc. ward co-ordination) Right! , consultants, public transport operators, other authorities: TRAM) DfT Cycling and walking user groups

- 308 -