[TCUG] Re: BV165 Re-visited
- From: "Hodge, Peter" <PeterHodge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:44:39 -0000
Dave,
Here in East Sussex the BV165 results are as follows:
Previous measure including Zebras = 82%
Previous measure excluding Zebras = 93%
New Formula excluding Zebras, but including dropped kerb measure (+/-6mm)=
58%
The new formula has resulted in a 24% drop when compared with previous
method, which included Zebras. It also shows that the inclusion of Zebras,
whilst using the previous method of measurement reduced the results by 11%.
Clearly we would support the removal of zebras from the calculations.
The introduction of the dropped kerb measure has therefore resulted in a
drop from 93% to 58% (35%)in real terms.
Hope this helps
Peter Hodge
Owen Williams Consultants
On behalf of East Sussex County Council
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Hulson [mailto:Dave.Hulson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 16 January 2003 08:50
To: TCUG
Subject: [TCUG] BV165 Re-visited
As the end of the financial year approaches and deadlines for Best Value
indicators draw near, it has fallen to me to calculate our BV165 figures
using the new 'formula'. To help us over the transition period from one
method of calculating the figures to the new method, I was asked to
produce start and end of year figures using both methods. Both sets of
figures showed an 'improvement' over the year but with the new figures
noticably lower than the figures calculated using the old method (about
seventy percent compared with about eighty percent).
Despite the fact that we are now counting something quite different to
before, our Best Value Team seem rather shocked by the difference in the
results and to calm them I have agreed to ask whether others have seen a
similar change in absolute value for BV165. If so, have others found
that the new value is generally higher or lower that the corresponding
figures calculated using the old method?
Thanks,
Dave Hulson
Nottingham City Council
***************************************************************************
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal
views which are not the views of Nottingham City Council unless specifically
stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system,
do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that Nottingham City
Council monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will
signify your consent to this.
***************************************************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
************************************************************************
This email contains confidential information, solely for the
person/organisation intended. If you received it in error,
please contact the sender right away and do not copy this email for any
purpose, or disclose its contents to any person. The contents of an
attachment to this email may contain software viruses which could
damage your own computer system. While Owen Williams has taken every
reasonable precaution to minimise the risk, we cannot accept liability
for any damage which you sustain as a result of software viruses. You
should carry out your own virus checks before opening the attachment.
************************************************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
Other related posts:
