Consultation and Engagement
Extensive
Consultation on the Plan since the submission of the provisional document has consisted of a number of initiatives
- Gaining detailed feedback from an extensive list of
stakeholder . This method has greatly aided the formulation of our strategies. For example, Manchester University's atmospheric research group became a consultee during our extensive consultation throughout 2005. They have given advice and assisted in the formulation of ourair quality strategy. - Signing of a concordat by
bus operator s to deliver the objectives of corridor partnerships - Consultation with the public through the 'Transport Matters' exercise
- Officer discussion with neighbouring authorities on how linkages can be improved between neighbouring plans
- Cross departmental consultation such as Local Transport Plan Steering Group and Strategy Co-ordinating group. This also involved
gauging opinions from the other network operators, specifically the
Highways Agency , therail industry and Manchester Airport. - Local Authority consultation on draft programmes.
Policy
Key messages from the consultation exercises are:
- Both the public and
stakeholder s agree with the public transport led approach proposed by the Greater Manchester Authorities. In short, a range of improvements to public transport were suggested, including support forMetrolink expansion and other major schemes, punctuality, integration, more comprehensive routes and services, investigations into new approaches to ticketing, developments and improvements to stations and interchanges; and improved cleanliness of vehicles. - In terms of people’s aspirations, both ‘carrot’ and ‘stick’ approaches were proposed. Consultees made reference to the importance
of aligning land use and
regeneration policy with any emerging transport agenda and the awareness of changing lifestyle choices which impact on the transport requirements of the travelling public in Greater Manchester. - Links with major employers,
schools and health facilities were seen as vital. These destinations are major trip generators that will increasingly require innovative approaches to relieve localisedcongestion andcar parking shortages. Representatives from these organisations expressed support forTravel Plans , safe walking routes and high quality bus services. - Problems with traffic flow were raised for certain routes at certain times. Improving traffic flow by better traffic signaling was a popular suggestion. There is also a belief that more emphasis needs to be placed on integration of different modes of transport. There was support for improvements to Interchange facilities, and increased parking near public transport links (e.g. park and ride).
- The public and
stakeholder s cited traffic as the major contributor to air andnoise pollution in Greater Manchester. This was complemented by support for sustainable modes such as improvements to routes and facilities to encourage walking and cycling. - The issue of safe and secure public transport was a recurrent theme, particularly from young people. Respondents believe that
public concerns regarding safety and antisocial behaviour are discouraging use. Although this may only be a perception, stakeholders
are supportive of improving safety at interchanges, and extending the use of
CCTV and real-time information. - Stakeholders believe that there are areas in Greater Manchester where
accessibility to key facilities is a problem. Theaccessibility planning work, using the Accession software, has been used to identify specific areas where problems exist. Solutions being investigated include assessment of different transport options including demand responsive transport for areas with relatively low demand. Consultation also highlighted concerns that somehousing and retail developments have been built on sites without consideration of access by public transport, walking orcycling .
Examples of how consultation has influenced our approach
Consultation has helped shape and improve Greater Manchester's transport policy and programmes. The examples below show how the engagement process has guided LTP development, and demonstrates how views have been expressed both in specific LTP consultations and in on-going continuous consultation.
(1) Directors of Public Health
When assessing the provisional LTP2 the directors of public health strongly recommended that LTP2 included a clear commitment
to complete the Greater Manchester Cycle Network by the end of the plan period and identified at least two orbital corridor
partnerships perhaps as a first step towards the high quality express orbital network previously proposed by the Directors.
Whilst we consider that we will not be able to complete the cycle network during the lifetime of LTP2, as we are focusing
resources to achieve value for money, our long-term aim will remain the development of a comprehensive network. A number of
other organisations also raised the issue of orbital partnerships, therefore, we will investigate areas where these may be
suitable and aim to have at least one operational during LTP2. The Directors of Public Health also expressed concern at the
provisional walking target (halting the decline in walking by the end of the plan period). A number of other
(2) Cycle England
Cycle England were provided with the provisional LTP and the cycling strategy and asked to comment. They gave broad support for the document, and thought that whilst our revised targets were ambitious, they were not unrealistic. Cycle England also supported our policy of targeting funding for cycle improvements at key areas around Greater Manchester in a bid to increase cycling numbers in these particular potential hot spots. Because of this endorsement the overall approach in final LTP2 remains unchanged from the provisional plan.
(3)
All
(4)
Results from both
Specific proposals for
More details of consultation, including methodologies, results, Greater Manchester responses to the points raised and information as to how they have shaped the document can be found in the consultation report in the LTP2 Technical Annex.

