“Behind closed doors” decision on transport, and other investment, needed for York Local Plan

The Council has sent off to central government its proposed new Local Plan. It brings to an end (potentially) 25 years of agonising about the future size of the City.The plan is a compromise on growth rates with over 850 additional homes scheduled to be built in each of the next 20 years.

One key implications of this “Big City” policy is the impact that it will have on the City’s infrastructure. Health, education, leisure and – crucially- transport systems will come under even greater pressure as the population grows.

The additional homes could wipe out any advantages being seen as a result of the small scale improvements currently programmed for the A1237.

Arterial roads could also reach grid lock unless there is substantial investment.

Hopes for an alternative network of  public transport routes also hang on key investment decisions with part of the resourcing needing to come from  developers.

All the stranger, therefore, that a report on what infrastructure improvements will be needed, and how they might be funded, was take at a private meeting yesterday. The papers on the Council web site give little clue to the assumptions contained in the plan. The Council says that more information may be published on 29th May.

Too late then for any critical input on what may yet prove to be the Achilles heel of the plan

Decision taken just hours before the Local Plan was submitted to central government

One thought on ““Behind closed doors” decision on transport, and other investment, needed for York Local Plan

  1. Gwen Swinburn says:

    Hi Steve

    It is even curiouser and I hope not fatal to the process (jr?) If looks on the evidence in the decision notice ( report not published interestingly). The decision title doesn’t even refer to the infrastructure elements. If I was a gambler I would bet on the report having been forgotten? Was it mentioned in the local plan working group? Or the Exec? Or the Council ( the fact that it hadn’t been done, the fact that it was ‘delegated ahem’ to staffers? Do we have any background on this apparent fag packet report? I most have missed the Forward Plan Officer decision notice and the fact that it was a key decision ( affects all wards) … is this an entire cock up or have I missed the discussions and notice of decision?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.