We would like to see ‘sustainability’ feature in the ‘vision statement’.

Congestion is mentioned as a ‘key challenge’ in connection with threatening economic growth (page 3). Yet the TIF bid is not currently supported by Trafford Council. Whilst we would have done certain things differently, Trafford Green Party supports the TIF bid as a means of securing the necessary funding for improvements in public transport and cycling provision. Your reluctance to charge motorists (page 4) removes the incentive for behaviour change and any provision of park and ride off the M56 (page 9) encourages long distance commuting.

The ‘Objectives’ appear reasonable but walking and cycling are only mentioned in conjunction with ‘trips to the Regional Centre’. Much more emphasis needs to be put on improving walking and cycling at the local level, as well as cycling on medium length journeys. We would like to include 20mph limits on residential roads, pedestrian prioritisation (both in terms of crossing provision and pedestrianisation of town centres) and cheaper fares on public transport. Planning needs to focus on providing local jobs for local people as well as the provision of local services so that people need to travel less. This should be the case in all situations and not just in support for ‘major mixed-use development opportunities’ (page 5, Objective 13).

Specific comments

• Airport jobs are predicted to increase ‘from 20,000 to 26,000 by 2015’ (page 4) - any expansion of the airport is just not sustainable. The Council needs instead to encourage employment growth in ‘Green’ industries. (See also M56 widening below.)
• Redevelopment of the Lancashire County Cricket Club should be to the highest eco standards giving Trafford a ‘Green’ flagship to be proud of. An opportunity that has been missed in the Altrincham Altair plans.
• A proportion of new development (page 5) should be car-free. Higher than average car ownership in Trafford needs to be addressed, perhaps through the support of car clubs.
• We support development of Old Trafford Metrolink, White city Station and Metro extension to Hale.
• Whilst improved accessibility to Carrington is needed, we do not support building a new road across green belt land (page 14). Other means of reducing congestion on the A6144 should be investigated: upgrading and subsidising public transport (rail, bus and water), prioritising cycle travel plans and managing development so that new industry is supported by a local workforce.
• Although we support the initiatives to increase ‘walking and cycling’ (page 8) more needs to be done. There should be increased funding for pedestrian crossings, especially near schools. As an example, the Council rejected the need for crossings in the vicinity of Bowdon C of E Primary School due to insufficient people crossing the road but better facilities for pedestrians encourage more people to walk, particularly where children are concerned.
• When addressing ‘air quality and the environment’ (page 8) the emphasis is to get traffic flowing whereas it should be to reduce the overall volume of traffic. There is no mention of reducing CO2 emissions.
• Instead of widening the M56 and carrying out improvements to Junction 6, can the money from Manchester Airport (agreed when runway 2 was constructed) be used to fund the Airport Metro? This would release TIF money for other things, perhaps including the Metro loop to Wythenshawe hospital.
• Trafford Cycling Strategy is to be reviewed (page 18). Can there also be a funding commitment?
• We support the school and workplace Travel Plan emphasis (page 20) and also the MUFC Travel Plan though, with the latter, walking routes need to be added and cycle provision improved.
• Altrincham does not need a VMS system for car parking. We suggest the money be saved or spent on something else such as more pedestrian crossings near schools.