APPENDIX B2

PARTICIPATION WORKSHOP OCTOBER 1999 SUMMARY OF MAIN ISSUES RAISED

In addition to the revision of the SPITS’ objectives, the following is a summary of the main issues arising from the day:

Integration

In order to translate the project into action, issues of integration cover:

1. An overall vision statement, which puts the project in a fuller context. This would need to take in social, economic, health, education and quality of life issues. Accessibility is important
2. The need to make strategic links with Local Transport Plans, Regional Development Plans, Regional Transport Strategies, Regional Development Authorities, local economic strategies, Countryside Agency, and Tourism strategies. Local Transport Plans are seen as the major delivery mechanisms, but sensible links need to be made with land use planning
3. The development of full sustainability appraisal methods, taking into account the broadening out above. This would need to take into account environmental, social, and economic issues, with social inclusion as an important theme
4. The inclusion of buses within the strategy as well as rail networks, and intermodality between all types of travelling. Good information about public transport services was seen as important
5. The relevance of Intra-Pennine issues as well as Cross-Pennine issues, covering all methods of travelling
6. The inclusion of the issue of freight transport as well as passenger transport
7. The theme of partnership working methods in order to progress SPITS-related projects. Mechanisms of working will need to be invented
8. The need to raise public awareness and keep local people engaged with the wider vision

Consultation

The importance of an ongoing process of consultation was highlighted:

1. Methods could include extensive leaflet distribution, newsletter, use of press/media, website, questionnaires, citizens’ juries, seminars, focus groups on key topics, bringing others into the Peak Park Transport Forum
2. Consultees need to include local community groups, disabled people, Parish Councils, local businesses, local media, wider public. This needs to be participative rather than reactive
3. Timescales of projects need to allow for adequate participation of consultees
4. It was accepted that there would be conflicts of interest, but we have to learn to live with this and find the best way forward

Evaluation

Evaluation of progress is required:

1. The need to set targets in order to assess progress
2. Information needs will therefore need to be considered, some of which may require further research e.g. origin and destination studies for freight movements

The complexities and inter-relatedness of the issues discussed led to the comment ‘can SPITS become a mindboggling plan for everything?’ Following the broadening out of the objectives, it was not seen as practical for SPITS to develop into what is, in effect, a Local Transport Plan for the South Pennines Region.

It was subsequently agreed by the Officer Working Group that:

‘SPITS will complement Local Transport Plans by devising mechanisms to progress initiatives which require or would benefit from inter-agency co-operation in the geographical region of the South Pennines area.’