Cheshire East signs up to regional transport lobby

Cllr Rachel Bailey

Cheshire East Council has joined other local authorities in the north west wishing to form a strategic transport-focused organisation Transport for the North.

Key objectives for the council will be to see that HS2 delivers the 360-degree connectivity hoped for when high-speed rail arrives in Crewe in 2027.

Extending high-speed rail beyond Crewe to Manchester Airport and Manchester, with aspirations to develop a fast trans-Pennine link, is also high on the agenda.

Council Leader Rachel Bailey said: "Transport for the North will have a major influence on transport investment in the north of England and Cheshire East will have a say in the development of the Strategic Transport Plan for the north.

"The next step is to put Transport for the North on a statutory footing and we are asking government to put the required regulations before Parliament without delay.

"This will help to provide the investment that Cheshire East needs in our infrastructure to support the economic growth and improved quality of life for all our residents."

Photo: Councillor Rachel Bailey, leader of Cheshire East Council.

Tags:
Cheshire East Council
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments

Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.

Pete Taylor
Sunday 27th August 2017 at 5:23 am
Do CEC have any mandate to represent us in this matter, given that they have failed to represent us on so many issues since they were set up.
DELETED ACCOUNT
Sunday 27th August 2017 at 8:02 am
Transport for the North - "A blueprint for devolving and integrating transport powers in England". http://bit.ly/2wScods

Meanwhile whilst "strategic transport" is being worked out from the combined forces of Manchester, and Warrington" - the "micro" sites within Cheshire East's Local Plan - their cumulative effects have been ignored because each is to be judged on a site by site basis.

Recipe for chaos?
Bob Bracegirdle
Wednesday 30th August 2017 at 5:26 pm
The madness continues. HS2 costing billions to replace the railway capacity we closed 50 years ago. HS2 terminating at Euston instead of at HS1 at St.Pancras - quite incredible non connection. And the cost of HS2 stopping electrification of other vital lines.

Manchester to Derby via Sheffield? Get the Midland line via Matlock reopened. Spend the money on our local lines not the vanity project to London.
Russell Young
Wednesday 30th August 2017 at 6:20 pm
Obviously a glamour project like HS2 has more appeal, than putting some effort into trying to save existing supported services that are likely to be withdrawn.
David Smith
Wednesday 30th August 2017 at 7:49 pm
The Metrolink is NOT the best form of mass public transport for a city like Manchester. It's too late now to change but whoever made the original decision to go for a tram system should have chosen the trolleybus instead. If you don't know this system have a look at the link: http://www.tbus.org.uk/home.htm The trolley bus operates in many cities around the world but is somehow shunned here in the UK. It is equivalent to a tram system but you don’t need to dig up the road and put down a track. There is NO cost for on-going track maintenance. The vehicles are SILENT - now get that and I'll say it again SILENT. NO squealing as they go round corners at slow speeds - have you ever noticed that when travelling on the Metro? It slows to SLOWER than walking pace when going round tight bends too. NO vibration as they pass your front door. Here is something for you to find out: what percentage of the total cost of the Manchester Metro is for the ground works? This cost is not required for a trolleybus system and so if the cost of the vehicles and overhead power supplies is about the same for a tram and a trolleybus, you can have the same route network for less cost or have a more extensive network for the same money. Now on this basis alone - why would anyone have chosen the tram over the trolleybus? PLUS WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RUN TRAINS THROUGH THE STREETS? A city like Liverpool should go ahead and plan a trolleybus network and then the rest of the Northwest can see how much better it is than the Manchester Metro. Over time a trolleybus route network could be such that most homes are within a short walk - but this will NEVER be the case for a tram network. So do I have any faith in our ‘leaders’ coming up with any viable ‘Transport for the North’ plan? Never! PS: Manchester Airport is also a fine example of poor design planning. The second runway was built in COMPLETELY the wrong place and has doomed the airport to be a lousy design layout that operates inefficiently and arguably not as safely as it otherwise could have been.
Pete Taylor
Wednesday 30th August 2017 at 9:22 pm
One of the many things which puzzle me is why our, dumped/resigned/had enough of him, because he was useless, former, man of the people, MP George (Gidiot, heir to two Irish Baronet titles) Osbourne is still, nominally, at the helm of the Northern Poorhouse disaster.
Perhaps our, relatively new, MP, Esther (how many disabled Remploy folks did you put out of work?) McVey might like to make a comment here?
Kathryn Blackburn
Thursday 31st August 2017 at 7:47 am
If we are to believe the ru/(a)mblings at Westminster HS2 will not move much beyond the Midlands that is if it makes it on to the Balance Sheet at all. Brexit will be costly one way or another.
Nick Jones
Thursday 31st August 2017 at 8:39 am
George Osborne now supports HS3 for 'Up North' not HS 2 http://bbc.in/2g0JPnH
Julian Barlow
Thursday 31st August 2017 at 9:27 am
They do like the word "Strategic" which they shoehorn into virtually every statement they make. Odd really, as anything that Cheshire East does seems to defy any sort of strategy whatsoever. In future I suggest they use the phrase "wing it" which would be more in keeping with their style of project management.
Barbara Scott
Thursday 31st August 2017 at 9:48 am
They should get the buses sorted out first. Public transport in Wilmslow is virtually non existed.