Agenda item

To consider a report of the Director of Place Management.

The report provides details of the proposed Transportation capital programme for 2025/26 and where possible an indicative programme for future years.

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to:

(1)  Comment on the proposed programme.

(2)  Recommend that the programme be approved by the Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways and Transport Services in line with the council budget.

Officer contact: Jamie Birtles on 07356 120 423 or Sue Stevenson on 0161 474 4351 or email jamie.birtles@stockport.gov.uk or sue.stevenson@stockport.gov.uk

The Director of Place Management submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing details of the proposed Transportation capital programme for 2025/26 and where possible an indicative programme for future years.

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:-

·         The differences between the Highway Planned Maintenance Fund and the Local Highways Maintenance Fund were set out: the former was a programme of works set out by highways inspectors who reported on highways requiring repair and were added to a list of works; the latter was a central government supplement provided to local highways authorities for resurfacing, patching and to supplement a reactive programme.

·         An additional 25 per cent of funding was available from the Local Highways Maintenance Fund and the council’s use of that fund might be readjusted in order to capture the government’s priorities and gain that additional funding. 

·         The council’s overall aim was to maintain its highways network whilst using funding from different pots to ensure it met its funding requirements.

·         It was reported that the cycle route on the part of the Transpennine Trail running between Brinksway and Cheadle had been damaged in the recent floods, with some parts of the pathway going into the river. The council was in the process of cataloguing all the damage caused across the borough resulting from the New Years Day flooding event and looking at what needed to be done to put it right.

·         It was noted that there was a £40,000 fund for remedial works and signing on existing cycle routes, however this was unlikely to be sufficient to repair structural damage to cycle routes.  

·         Where extensive repairs were required on sections of the Transpennine route, the council would be looking for a specific funding pot; the work was unlikely to form part of its capital programme.

·         In terms of regeneration work at Stockport Train Station, members enquired as to the proposals to facilitate pedestrian access through the station and whether this would use the existing underutilised underpass or by way of a footbridge.  In response, it was stated that it was planned to take advantage of the topography and create an elevated two-tier approach. Extensive consultation was planned in relation to any proposed changes at the station.

·         Members sought an update in relation to the development of a connecting ramp between Railway Road and the Thompson Street car park. In response it was stated that the £4 million which had been allocated to the Town Centre West would help to accelerate planned projects within Edgeley.

·         In relation to the Greek Street bridge replacement, it was reported that the council had undertaken work to maximise the value from that project.

·         Last year’s flood strategy had included a proposed scheme at Woodbank Park; it was reported that the council’s bid for a 50 per cent contribution from United Utilities towards that scheme had been unsuccessful.

·         Officers undertook to report on the proposal for resurfacing the Dark Lane, Bredbury cycleway.

·         The council had a list of access controls across the borough, some were privately owned and information was still being sought in relation to others. Area Committees would be asked to make final decisions in relation to council owned access controls.

·         The Transport Capital Programme reflected a more structured approach to delivering 20 mph zones going forward.

·         Funding was available for School Streets through TfGM for the management of residents, volunteers and school representatives. Funding was also available through the capital programme for poles, lines and signs associated with School Streets.

·         The capital programme’s designation of £28,000 towards highway trees was noted and officers undertook to report on whether newly installed trees were monitored.

·         It was reported that when drains were surveyed, they were checked for roots entering the drainage system. The council was not resourced to undertake checks on highway trees to establish whether the roots were causing drainage issues. However, where there were reports of blockages, roots were cleared from drains.

·         There was an ongoing recruitment issue for school crossing patrols and the council was actively trying to recruit additional school crossing patrol staff.

·         In terms of road safety around schools, the council had assessed what physical changes could be made to improve the road layout and safety for children crossing roads.

·         It was reported that there was a dual approach to road maintenance; one was work planned in advance funded by the capital programme and the other was reactive work, responding to defects on the network.

·         The council had a statutory responsibility to focus on particular issues such as skid risk routes and high crash routes. It also prioritised the key route network for those with higher traffic volumes which had the biggest impact on the environment, the economy and movement of people around the borough. In terms of the council’s reactive work, it had differing timelines for the repair strategic routes, A-B routes and residential roads.

·         The differences between a Section 106 agreement and a Section 278 agreement were set out, with the former being broader in scope and the latter being more specific to transport and the provision of the highways network.

·         The town centre car parking study, which had been allocated £50,000 from the capital programme, was designed to look at parking regulation orders within the town centre as it continued to grow, to determine whether they remained appropriate. The study would look at the use of parking permits within the town centre and at the town centres stock of car parks.

·         The allocation of £40,000 for Speed Indicator Devices (SIDs) was to complete the programme of monitoring areas where speed had been raised as a concern. It was likely that the council would use alternative SID technology in the future.

·         £80,000 had been allocated towards the Section 19 report into the New Years Day flooding, which was aimed at understanding the causes, who the responsible bodies were and potential mitigation. It was also designed to provide evidence to obtain funding from the flooding statutory agencies.

·         Residents had been encouraged to contribute to that study by using the flooding email address to share their concerns and provide evidence.

RESOLVED - (1) That the programme be noted.

(2) That the Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways and Transport Services be recommended to approve the programme in line with the council budget.