Canal27ways

Category: Environment

  • Committees may not be a good way to design a car, but they’re the way to make sure the city ticks

    There have still been a few meetings happening as we enter the summer break. Whilst I haven’t attended all in person, the importance of the subject matter has made it imperative to read the reports and catch the video streams. Committees are hard work and you still get the occasional member who can never reach a full stop, but there’s been so much else to take on board.

    Executive
    Greater Manchester Scrutiny
    Trafford’s Health Scrutiny
    Datalab update
    National Policy Forum

    Executive

    Although I’m not a member of the Council’s Executive, primarily it’s their decisions upon which I’ll be judged when it comes to being re-elected. I like to follow what they’re up to.

    Items on the agenda included:

    A new Culture Strategy for Trafford.

    The culture strategy document is available here. I like that the emphasis is as much on bringing on new talent as putting on shows. My own feeling is that Greater Manchester has improved its arts output hugely since Salford fought off the City of Manchester in winning the BBC to Media City, but Manchester still dwarfs everyone else combined. The fact that Oldham Colosseum closed shows how tough it is. I think I’d like to see a Greater Manchester approach and Trafford feeding into that with its strategy but not competing.

    Tennis Investment Project

    This involves a charging policy and the procurement of a specialist operator for the tennis courts the council owns such as at Davyhulme Park and Victoria Park. Initially, it will be trialled and I don’t think they’ve announced yet where the trials will be.

    Active Travel Reprioritisation

    The battle of the A56 cones has almost become a defining cultural phenomenon. However, it looks as though Trafford has received the go-ahead to move forward with a designed scheme that would make permanent arrangements. From the funding point of view, this means including it within the Mayor of Greater Manchester’s Challenge Fund Budget. (The Dept of Transport originally funded the cones as an emergency measure during Covid)

    Sadly, we do not get junction improvements to the Barton Road gyratory and active cyclists heading towards Altrincham will still be deposited into the fast lane of the A56. The approach to design has been to leave the junction in place, but weave a cycle and walking route on and through the central island. It’s a problem because it involves so many crossings which will delay the active traveller.

    Trafford is bidding for £1.6m for the whole scheme to provide permanent segregation from Talbot Road to the M60 including the gyratory weave and crossings. A lot of active travellers have already pointed out that the M60 is not where they usually choose to end their journey and that is a problem, at a minimum their heading to Dane Road.

    My conclusion on the A56: So the A56 scheme is not perfect; far from it. Despite this, I am still supportive of the bid. The cones have been so divisive and have brought out the worst in people. We need to move on.

    Additional Schemes

    The two Talbot Road junctions with Chester Road and with Greatstone Road have already received full business case approval and they’re particularly anticipated with a degree of eagerness. I’ve been pursuing Greatstone Road junction improvements for pedestrians for a number of years so there’s a degree of fulfilment attached to that.

    Pipeline Scheme – Davyhulme Active neighbourhood (technically route D). I really need to publicise this more. I am yet to be convinced it’s a worthwhile scheme. They’re hoping to have the business case submitted by January 2024. Essentially, it’s five low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTN)s. We know Rishi Sunak does not like LTNs, but they can be worthwhile – most of Stretford around Victoria Park is essentially a low-traffic neighbourhood, they’ve cut off exits onto Chester Road or Kingsway. My initial reaction to the Davyhulme scheme is that it condenses the traffic onto residential streets rather than main roads and that’s a problem.

    Greater Manchester Scrutiny Committee

    Again, I’m not a member, but in this case, I am a substitute member. Items discussed included.

    Topics included:

    • National Waste Strategy – essentially balancing the need to recycle more with the practicalities of fine-sorting the waste. The government are shifting their position
      Trafford’s Leader, Cllr Tom Ross gave a really top-notch presentation that’s worth watching on the GMCA site
    • Bus Fare Initiatives including capped fares. Funding is in place for 24/25. The introduction has led to an increase of 12% in patronage so GMCA is keen on continuation. To review it again next summer. Franchising will have a positive behavioural effect. In fact, franchising is so exciting in that it opens up so many possibilities. The tragedy would be if funding was pulled from 2025.

    Trafford Health Scrutiny

    Another packed meeting. Items included:

    Adaptations Team and Occupational Therapy Update – This is a major contributor to quality of life and hospital discharges. The team has a serious backlog that can be traced back to Covid. Scrutiny was looking at the action plan to alleviate the delays.

    Hospital Discharge – A broader look at resilient discharge – making sure that patients leaving hospital have the support needed to sustain themselves.

    Integrated Care System Update – This is yet another reorganisation; in this case to replace the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). Although it sounds dry, this is a vital element of health provision. The Greater Manchester model is proving itself in terms of life expectancy. The journey to transform health care though is only just beginning and building a system that integrates both care and health provision requires organisational change. There’s a huge amount of work going on behind the scenes. It’s vital that scrutiny monitors this change but it’s quite a significant task.

    Trafford Datalab Presentation

    This was presented last week as part of my induction on returning to the council, but I don’t need any persuasion. I love the work they do and their output is generally open data. I just want to highlight one particular page – the census data. It’s a cornucopia of intelligence but vital in targeting and championing resources.

    Labour’s National Policy Forum

    Gender recognition law has been a divisive subject in the Labour Party and elsewhere, but particularly in the Labour Party.

    I wanted to briefly state that I believe the position taken at the National Policy Forum at the weekend seems to me to be just about right. I know that others will disagree but I back Anneliese Dodds:

    We need to recognise that sex and gender are different – as the Equality Act does. We will make sure that nothing in our modernised gender recognition process would override the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. Put simply, this means that there will always be places where it is reasonable for biological women only to have access. Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers of single-sex services.

    Anneliese Dodds – Labour Shadow Secretary of State, Women and Equalities – Guardian 24 July 2023

  • We hear good words but we’re not delivering the change needed

    I’m indebted to my colleague Councillor Jill Axford for sharing this video. Jill herself has been ahead of the curve with regard to climate change for a long time. She’s absolutely spot on. We’re nowhere near where we need to be. We must stop deceiving ourselves that technological solutions will make it all disappear. Please watch this video. It’s only 16 minutes but there’s clarity here.

    We’re seeing the significant weather events. We’re seeing the damage to our community. We really do need to take this seriously.

    Raglan Road
  • Lead Councillor brings Trafford up to Speed on the Cones

    Lead Councillor brings Trafford up to Speed on the Cones

    Hardly a week passes without a new thread on Facebook or Twitter about the cycle lanes going through Stretford. The main complaint has been the lack of transparency and news about what’s going to happen to them. Will they be made permanent? Will they be taken out? Will the cones be there forever?

    There’s been some changes to Trafford’s leadership since the election and Councillor Aidan Williams has been added to the cabinet to take on Climate Change and Transport Strategy.

    Councillor Williams took the opportunity of addressing a petition to give a wider update on the A56 last week when Council met at the town hall. The actual petition sought to exploit unused rail space alongside the Stretford Metrolink all the way down to Sale to provide additional cycling capacity. The council leadership agreed to explore the potential of this proposal but highlighted the limited access as an issue that meant it could never offer an alternative to the A56 for short journeys on bikes.

    The cycle lanes have been frustrating for drivers and cyclists alike. Now that Councillor Williams is in place, we’re beginning to get coherent messaging. First indication was a tweet that Aidan put out in mid July, a simple tweet that made its way to both the Manchester Evening News and the Messenger.

    The update at last Wednesday’s council meeting built on the information given out in the tweet. The council is going to consult on permanent cycling infrastructure in Stretford linking it via the Talbot Road scheme and (Old) Chester Road that gives Stretford continuous segregated cycling to the Manchester border. The design and landscaping within the town centre itself will be wrapped up within the town centre masterplan there.

    Full Text of Speech


    Personally, I very much welcome this. It’s beginning to join up cycling facilities. We need to see what they come up with at the Talbot Road junction because that’s still dangerous and if the test is a 12 year old being safe, we’re still a long way from that. But hey, this is so much better than what we’ve been used to.

    I’m really pleased that we’re getting some transparency now and it sounds like Councillor Williams wants to listen to all interested parties. Clarity is vital. We now know that cycle lanes won’t be installed along Chester Road in Gorse Hill. That will disappoint many, but at least knowing it, means that we can focus getting more crossings of that road. A crossing at Gorse Hill Park gates is an absolute must.

    And we still urgently need that pedestrian phase at the Park Road/Derbyshire Lane junction so people can walk to Stretford without having to sprint. If Councillor Williams’s Transport Strategy responsibilities extend to getting people across roads, we’ve got a chance to start seeing some real improvements.

    • Canvassing Kingsway Park

      Canvassing Kingsway Park

      Things I heard:

      Better maintenance of drains and general upkeep of streets wanted including weed control

      – I heard this from quite a few residents. It’s a difficult one but we shouldn’t dismiss it. There was one grid pointed out to me that actually looked as though it had been cleaned. I might be wrong but if we have residents who believe their streets are not being serviced, and it worries them, shouldn’t we be giving better data. They’re paying council tax but we’re giving back information that’s borderline facetious describing the leaf clearance in terms of its weight in elephants. If residents want to know when and how often their grids ought to be cleared and whether that has happened we should be telling them.

      I do think there’s a discussion to be had about street upkeep more generally. Cheap black tarmac patching on pavements highlight the fact that the pavements were originally laid to a standard that we’ll never match again. Whilst hopefully we can fund better than we do now, it’s probably unrealistic to think councils will ever realistically have sufficient funds to bring pavements and roads to a standard that people truly aspire to. How did that happen? Looking at it from a lay perspective, it looks to me that we’ve gone backwards even allowing for the increased workload we place on roads and pavements. Are we really using low tech and manual labour to standards lower than we used 100 years ago? Have councils and highway authorities demanded the sufficient improvements in technology and productivity that we’ve seen in almost every other field of work?

      We really do need to enforce encroachment of vegetation onto the pavement. We’re denying people the right to move about freely if they’re pushing a pram or using mobility aids. This was raised by a resident in connection with a near neighbour and she’s absolutely right to raise.

      I thought it interesting that one resident felt political parties ought to be more capable of working together. It’s polarised. I don’t know how we can change that.

      Doorstep conversations are always interesting and provocative. I always come back with more challenges to the way we do things.


    • Amey and Trafford’s relationship is up for Review

      Amey and Trafford’s relationship is up for Review

      The Amey One Trafford Partnership has been a feature of life in Trafford for the last six and a half years and we’re coming up to the 7 year review.

      So whether you’re itching to get Amey out of your life, or happy to move forward together, councillor scrutiny of the contract has commenced.

      7 year Review

      The agreement was signed 7th May 2015 and the partnership is due to end on the 30th June 2030 for everything but the street lighting contract, which gets an extra 5 years until 2035.

      There is a provision for the council to ask for an 8 year extension to 2038 if it so chooses, but to all intents and purposes the bulk of the contract is a 15 year agreement and we’re coming up to that half way point.

      What gets to be reviewed?

      The terms of the review are specified under clause 12 of the agreement. The terms have their roots in the original aims of the ‘Reshaping Trafford’ project set out at the onset of the tender in March 2015:

      • To deliver a minimum of 20% savings against the net budget from contract commencement.
      • To deliver further, future efficiency savings through continuous improvement and innovation in service provision through the contract life.
      • To have flexibility, recognising the challenging financial climate facing local authorities at the moment.
      • Protect jobs and maintain service standards in so far as practicable.

      So this time last year under clause 12, the council must have begun the process to assess Amey’s performance against:

      • Achieving value for money in its services on behalf of the council
      • Preparing Service Plans
      • Satisfying the users of services
      • Satisfying the council
      • Providing a competitive service

      And the council will have engaged in a dialogue in order to determine whether it wished to exercise rights to request a Seven year options proposal very much focused within the agreement on cost reduction, so that those options will consider in order of precedence:

      • Efficiency improvement
      • Income generation
      • Reconfiguration of service delivery
      • Adjustment of targets and performance
      • Adjustment to scope

      At the end of the review

      As you can see the Tory contract always envisaged service degradation at this point in the agreement. It has to be said that the Tories also envisaged that Amey might not wish to comply, or they may wish to make counter proposals that the council the council would find unacceptable. Both these outcomes are provided for in the agreement along with a protocol designed to bring both parties together but with the possibility of agreement termination as the ultimate recourse.

      Conclusion

      This process must be coming to its latter stages now and the call has been made for a cross party group to come together to look at the review. I don’t have any insight into where we’re at but probably wouldn’t be able to tell you if I did have.

      Politically, whatever changes are made will be Labour changes.

      It’s worth pointing out then that I’m convinced the ‘Reshaping Trafford’ project, more than anything, led to the demise of the Conservatives in Trafford. A 20% reduction in funding for the only services that we all use was the most comprehensive suicide note that any council has written ever. Whatever happens at this seven year review, it’ll still be a Conservative project but increasingly we in Labour will be held to be responsible for its day to day running. It’s in our interest to make the partnership more accountable to its users and that’s something actually enshrined in the agreement.

      Clause 12:13 talks about whether or not “the Service Provider has to a material extent failed to satisfy the users of the Services in relation to the Service Provider‘s performance under this Agreement.”

      Facebook photo of OT revolting Protest 2017 (Year 2 of Contract)

      I think it’s fairly clear that ‘Love Old Trafford’ had their patience stretched by Amey and the council. Once the 7 year review is over, I don’t believe the distinction between Amey and the council will wash. It’ll be council services and we’ll to a much greater extent have to satisfy the users of the services.

      That said, there’s real chance for Amey and senior councillors be more joined up and responsive to the public and their representatives. The prospect of another seven years of staying together just because they have to is too depressing to contemplate. This isn’t a marriage. The seven year review provides a chance to bring partnership back to the fore. I hope it goes well.

    • Good Strategy, Implementation when? Ever?

      We’ve had two very different reports this week in Trafford. Both the “Streets for All Strategy” from Andy Burnham’s team and the replacement of pop-up cycle lanes consultation got approval. Whilst the overall strategy seems clear, and there ought to be a greater focus on helping us use healthier travel options when appropriate, implementation appears elusive and the possibility of turning the clock back looks to be on the cards for Trafford.

      Streets For All Strategy

      Link to Decision

      Link to Strategy

      The 10 Greater Manchester Authorities are adopting this strategy. It’s been adopted by Trafford this week. The vision is:

      We will ensure that our streets are welcoming, green, and safe spaces for all people, enabling more travel by walking, cycling and using public transport while creating thriving places that support local communities and businesses.

      Streets for All Vision

      Valuing our streets as community assets

      Streets for All recognises the value of our local places, something which Covid-19 has shone a light on. We want streets that feel part of the community, not just a route for cars to travel along. In my view it’s belatedly recognising that towns so focused and dependent on car use are neither going to be attractive nor prosper. My goodness, it’s taken Stretford a long time to appreciate that.

      Green Places

      The strategy acknowledges that since road transport generates nearly a third of all carbon emissions, we are going to need to see significant changes in the ways people travel. This will require radical change in how people, goods and
      services move into and around our city-region.

      Expected Standards

      Vitally, expected standards on the different road types are set out. The key is delivering these and it’s not all about huge infrastructure projects. So for instance, on our strategic and connector roads network such as the A56 and Park/Barton Roads, crossings should be provided where people need them that allow them to cross quickly and safely.

      We aren’t delivering to the standard now. There’s work to be done: the Park Road/Derbyshire Lane junction is a nightmare for pedestrians and should be a priority, and equally, there still isn’t a crossing on the A56 to Gorse Hill Park main entrance where it is very much needed. Nevertheless, the strategy does at least set out priorities and expectations. And it’s down to us hold the decision makers to account as to whether they’re adhering to it.

      Consultation for Temporary Pop-up Cycle Lanes

      Link to Decision

      Link to Report

      In an entirely different report Trafford’s Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services (Cllr Stephen Adshead) approved a proposal to consult with the public on the three options for the future of the popup cycle lanes along the A56:

      • to replace it with a shared bus/cycle lane;
      • to replace it with a protected cycle only lane; or
      • to remove it entirely and revert to pre-COVID-19 status.

      Shared Bus/Cycle Lane

      There’s no getting away from it that this is something of a confused and contradictory report. Whilst a bus/cycle lane is presented as an option (perhaps even a preferred option), there seems to have been very little evaluation, no mention of working with the bus companies or identification of services. There are in fact no bus services on the A56 Bridgewater Way, so either they are prepared to mix and match (something the report explicitly rules out) or they could end up with a bus lane with no buses on a significant portion of the route.

      I’m not entirely comfortable with the premise that cycle lanes and bus lanes are interchangeable and have similar characteristics. How a bus lane deals with left turns is usually to simply end and allow all vehicles into the lane. That’s really hazardous for people riding bicycles. Nevertheless there are good reasons to have bus lanes and they could make a difference in places where installing a continuous cycle lane proved difficult, for instance in Gorse Hill and Sale. However, these places seem outside the scope of the report. It’s a missed opportunity.

      Bus Lanes need enforcement as there’s no physical separation. Fines are the normal enforcement means. This doesn’t get a mention but will be a controversial element of any bus lane implementation.

      It would have been sensible to have included consultation drafts with the report. So far bus lanes have not been mentioned in the council’s press releases with regard to the consultation. Nevertheless they form a major option in the report so, I guess we will have to wait to see the consultation material to be able to judge whether this is serious or just cover for getting rid of the pop-up lanes.

      Replace with a protected cycle only lane

      Again we’ll have to see. The bike lanes have not been a problem everywhere and in Stretford town centre perhaps the greatest benefit has been moving the traffic back a lane allowing bars to flourish and pedestrians to breathe.

      The Bridgewater Way section has no pavement and whilst a shared-use path seems the obvious solution, the options available seem to rule it out. This would be a huge missed opportunity, the cones have made it so much safer for fans travelling to the stadium.

      Remove A56 pop-up cycle lanes entirely and revert to pre-COVID-19 status

      Cycle lanes have proved problematic in places particularly on Edge Lane and at Stretford Tip. In other places I would argue that they’ve regulated traffic flow; the A56 varies along its length, in places three lanes and sometimes one lane. Sometimes the lanes are generous widths other times (at Stretford Sports Centre for instance) very narrow. I’m sure some drivers would welcome the entire removal whether or not it improved their travel times but I think most accept that the main thing is to keep the traffic flowing.

      I suspect overall total removal will be the popular option. Whilst the report goes out of its way to say the consultation is not a referendum, the current hostility to the cones suggests we’re unlikely to get a nuanced response.

      I don’t know where it leaves the A56/Talbot Road junction improvement project as initial plans put protected cycling at the core of the new junction. There’s an argument that Trafford will be excluded from further funding as a consequence of abandoning improvements that had previously been granted so the project might be dead in the water if we take out the cycle lanes now.

      Edge Lane

      Treated differently, in fact the decision now taken allows modifications to take place prior to a road safety audit.

      We’ll have to see the extent to which it is included in the consultation. I would hope that they can make modifications almost straightaway as it’s causing misery to so many people and it’s regrettable it’s not been addressed more quickly. Personally, I think it’s sensible and urgent to do it in any event.

      Conclusion

      We’ll have to see where this leaves us. If we are going down the bus lanes option, it seems clear to me that we’re going to have to bring in the right skills. It’s not just a continuous white line, we ought to be thinking about bus-stops and junctions. I still don’t see sufficient adherence to the Streets for All Strategy, in fact we’re setting one set of road users against others when we don’t need to and it still delivers nothing to pedestrians who supposedly are at the top of the hierarchy.