Agenda item

To consider a report of the Director of Place Management.

The report advises Councillors on the progress of the delivery of the Walking and Cycling Strategy and the wider commitment to active travel in 2024.

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to note and comment upon the report.

Officer contact: Jamie Birtles on 07356 120 423 or email jamie.birtles@stockport.gov.uk

The Director of Place Management submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) advising Councillors on the progress of the delivery of the Walking and Cycling Strategy and the wider commitment to active travel in 2024.

The Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways and Transport Services (Councillor Grace Baynham) attended the meeting to respond to councillors’ questions.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

·         Members thanked officers for their work in securing funding for the creation of active travel schemes, including the helix ramp at Stockport Interchange, the A34 network and the Romiley scheme.

·         The report set out Greater Manchester’s ambition for 50 per cent of people to use public transport or active travel to commute to work by 2040; members stated that to achieve such a goal, more schemes and more integration of schemes was needed.

·         Members stated that the safety of women and girls would be incorporated into the overall ambition to increase the use of public transport and active travel.

·         In relation to mapping active travel routes with socio-economic duty, it was reported that the council would focus on making active travel routes a network in order to link different parts of the borough together. Members were requested to provide suggestions for locations of active travel routes.

·         Clarification was sought about the proposed cycling scheme which would run parallel to the A6. It was reported that there was not a scheme currently in development but that there was a potential for future development through Mayoral Funding.

·         Members requested further information on Access Controls at a future meeting of this Scrutiny Committee.  

·         Members welcomed the work undertaken to encourage children to engage with walking and cycling, which should help to foster lifelong habits.

·         Members commented that, although the report had not identified any potential sites for pedestrian crossings with count-down signals, the road crossing underneath the bridge adjacent to Asda in the town centre would be a potential candidate for the use of a count-down signal.

·         It was reported that there was an ongoing GM project looking at improving urban pathways.

·         In terms of the maintenance of active travel schemes, it was reported that there were two elements of funding, the capital funding for the development and implementation of a scheme and the revenue funding which was used for ongoing maintenance. Additional maintenance funding was required as there was likely to be an increased maintenance liability going forward. The council was allocated a maintenance block annually for funding which was required to cover all transport and highways schemes across the borough including surfaces, draining and structure repair. It also had a separate internal revenue scheme for potholes and patching. Decisions on maintenance was made on the basis of risk assessments. 

·         The funding for the majority of the borough’s transport schemes was obtained from TfGM.

·         Members suggested that the safety of the borough’s cycle routes should be advertised to its residents. It was also suggested that an increase in maintenance of cycle routes would encourage more residents to use them.

·         Members referred to schemes within the report which had been marked as complete. One in particular, the Offerton to Stockport scheme had been marked as completed but was, in fact, awaiting completion.

·         The council had considered the introduction of cargo bikes, however a funding stream would be required to introduce them.

·         In relation to pavement parking obstructing cycling lanes, it was reported that the council was awaiting further powers to deal with that problem and in some instances, traffic regulation orders (TROs) were required. In the meantime the council had attempted to design schemes which mitigated that issue.

·         It was reported that, should the government introduce legislation to ban pavement parking, TROs would be required to allow for pavement parking rather than to ban it. In those circumstances, it was prudent to await an expected imminent government decision on pavement parking rather than introduce TROs now to ban pavement parking.

·         Members asked about the scope for introducing Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology for the borough’s school streets, rather than relying on volunteers. In response it was reported that different sets of guidance on the use of ANPR had been issued by the government and TfGM. The use of that technology was under consideration by the council.

·         Members commented that the council and wider GM ambitions ought to be politically bold in their ambitions for active travel within the region.

·         Barriers to accessing active travel should be removed without delay.

·         In terms of ‘mini Holland’ schemes, which use Dutch-style infrastructure, it was reported that those are difficult to deliver with a consensus among the local population.

·         Members asked whether the council had any initiatives on sustainable travel to school. In response it was stated that the council would endeavour to encourage schools to think about sustainable travel.

·         It was reported that the introduction of a pedestrian crossing at the A6 at Interchange Park would be in place in the near future. 

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.