Agenda item

To consider a report, which has been prepared to allow Members of the

Cheshire East Council Places Advisory Panel to consider and comment on

Cheshire’s Local Transport Plan (LTP) Progress Report for 2008. It also

seeks views on emerging issues that may need to be considered during the

remainder of the plan period.

The Panel received a presentation in respect of progress with regard to the Local Transport Plan.  Consideration was also given to a paper which had been prepared to allow Members of the Panel to consider and comment on the Local Transport Plan progress report for 2008.  It also sought views on managing issues that may need to be considered during the remainder of the Plan period.  A short summary setting out details of the LTP process was attached as an appendix to the report.

It was noted that a summary of the document had been circulated with the agenda, however the full document would be circulated to Members of the Panel.

In considering the report, Members of the Panel raised the following issues:

(i)      With reference to the presentation, it was noted that it had been stated that there were no significant air quality problems in the area and this was questioned as the area was above the North West and National average for CO2.  It was reported that within the document with regard to air quality there were seven listed pollutants and CO2 was not one of them.

(ii)   Reference was made to the pie chart within the document, which showed that approximately half of the capital expenditure for 2006-2008 had been spent on public transport, and it was queried how much of this had been spent in the Cheshire East area.  It was noted that, broadly speaking, 50% had been spent in the Cheshire East area, but that more had been spent in the rural areas.

(iii)   Reference was made to the recent result of the TIF referendum and it was considered that the new Cheshire East Authority needed to ensure that there was fairness in respect of the distribution of funding and that  the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities engaged with the Cheshire East Authority in respect of the receipt of national funding.  It was noted that the new Cheshire East Authority would be the third largest unitary in the North West, and the advent of the new authority would provide the opportunity to apply for appropriate funding.  It was also noted that currently the provision of public transport in Cheshire was complex and there would now be an opportunity to consider how to deliver Public Transport in a more efficient way.

(iv)    It was queried whether there would be a Local Transport Plan for Cheshire East and if so, when. It was noted that the current Local Transport Plan would be adopted and central Government guidance was expected shortly, which would need to be taken into account, with a view to publication of a document for Cheshire East in 2010, to commence in 2011.

(v)   Reference was made to traffic congestion in Crewe and it was considered that this was exacerbated by the fact that the traffic lights were not co-ordinated.  The Portfolio Holder stated that the introduction of urban traffic control measures would benefit all areas of Cheshire East in this regard, including Crewe & Nantwich.

(vi)    With reference to LTP capital expenditure for 2006-2008, it was noted that the expenditure for cycling schemes had only been £172,000 for 2006/07 and only £1,000 for 2007/08.  It was queried whether there was any way this could be enhanced.  It was reported that there had been a lot of investment in the past in respect of millennium cycle routes and in addition to the expenditure set out in the document, there would be additional funding through Travel Plans.  However, if it was considered that cycling was a priority, the expenditure levels could be raised.

(vii)   It was queried whether funding would be made available for pedestrian crossings.  It was noted that some were provided through Local Safety Schemes.  However, the new Authority may wish to raise this as a priority in the future.

RESOLVED

That the above comments be noted.