Congestion Commission plan under spotlight

Opposition Councillors have called in Labour’s £135,000 plan to establish a “Congestion Commission” in the City. The move means that an all party committee will decide whether the scheme will go ahead now or whether an alternative, providing better value for taxpayers, might be substituted after May’s elections.

The rethink request has the support of LibDem, Tory, Independent and Independent Labour Councillors.

The position of the two Green Councillors – who increasingly vote with Labour – is unclear.

It is an important consideration as, despite only holding 23 of the 47 council seats, the Green/Labour alliance has a majority on the committee which decides “calling in” applications.

The expectation, that the majority view on the Council (since it became “balanced” in October) would prevail, has been undermined by the new alliance.

 Initially an inquiry into the Lendal Bridge fiasco was rejected, then the Greens sided with Labour in favour of “safeguarding” parts of the Green Belt for development and, most recently, they voted through the use of the Guildhall as a “digital media centre“.

The extent of the Greens confusion on the latter issue can be seen by a justification written by one of their Councillors on the web. He compares the Guildhall to the Barbican claiming that the media centre project is the only way of preventing it falling into disuse and decay.

His comparison with the Barbican is mostly based on a selective, and inaccurate, recall of history. The main reason that building was empty for several years was because of legal action, taken by a group of residents, to try to prevent the building being sold to the private sector.

There may be a clue there for the future of the Guildhall. With the published plans showing “workstations” being established in the old Guildhall itself, the associated  infrastructure work is highly likely to prompt similar legal action.  

Labour’s plan for the Guildhall also includes a bar and restaurant – the kind of uses that could only exacerbate the “party city” issues which afflict the center of York.

The planned £1.8 million overhaul of the Mansion House will attract more tourists to the area. They will expect to be able to access the historic Guildhall.

Much better, in our view, therefore to redevelop the 60’s office block (currently hidden from view) and use the revenue generated from that to sustain the fabric of the listed building, while ensuring continued public access.

So why are the Greens supporting Labour policies?

picture 100

The reason is that they see the most likely wards in which they can make progress (and the biggest threat to their retaining their Fishergate stronghold) are those with Labour Councillors. They have their eyes on Micklegate and Guildhall. If they can reduce the number of issues on which there is open policy conflict they hope that the, largely untested, Green candidates will be the default choice for left leaning voters wanting to  reject the unpopular, or ailing, sitting Councillors. 

They hope to deflect attention away from their more extreme policies (they were bigger fans of the Lendal bridge closure and the introduction of indiscriminate 20 mph speed limits than many of their Labour counterparts).

So the majority of the Council will opt for a two stage approach to setting up a congestion policy review.

The first phase – in the lead up to May’s Council elections – would be to establish what is the most appropriate structure, consider options for membership and begin to gather, up to date, traffic data.

The real work could only begin after May 7th – by which time all of the existing members of the York Council may have lost their seats.

Democracy in the City faces a major test at the meeting taking place on 23rd February

York Traffic Congestion Commission gets off to poor start

No attempt made to gain broad based support

Papers published this week give details of a Congestion Commission (CC) which is supposed to plot a way forward for transport policy in the City. It will cost taxpayers around £130,000.

Lendal bridge notice

Lendal Bridge closure went on for 8 months costing taxpayers over £1 million

The origins of the “Commission” are the lamentable failures of the present Council’s transport polices which culminated in the Lendal Bridge fiasco. When the extent of the failure of that “trial” became apparent it was abandoned and proposals for a “Commission” were hastily unveiled.  The, now unseated, Leader of the Council, had a penchant for “Commissions” which sounds grander than a policy review (which is effectively what the proposal is).

Labour and Green Councillors then voted not to review how and why the Lendal Bridge trial had gone so badly wrong.

One previous Commission (the Fairness Commission) failed simply because it didn’t attempt to attract all party support.  A former Labour Councillor was even parachuted in to be the chair of that organisation.

 The terms of the new Congestion Commission are similarly being bounced onto opposition Councillors, more or less guaranteeing an atmosphere of distrust if not downright hostility from day 1.

A sensible approach would have been to publish the proposed terms of reference of the Commission and invite comments.  If a mixture of lay people and Councillors were considered to be necessary, then the skills required (as have been suggested in the report) could also have been discussed.

Blossom Street/Station Rise remodeling has been a success. But Council is failing to maintain car park space availability signs

Only after a consensus on these issues had been achieved, could approaches be made to individuals who might contribute.

Instead Labour have published their preferred choice for Chair of the Commission – effectively daring non Labour Councillors to come up with alternatives.  That will place the prospective  “Chair” in a difficult position.

The other issue is, of course, one of timing.

There is both a General Election (which will help to determine how much money will be available to be spent on transport across the UK) and “all out” Council elections (at which York residents will have the opportunity to give a verdict on the current Councils transport mishaps) taking place on May 7th.

The result’s of both elections will have a major impact on the amount of money that York has to spend on transport and the priorities of York residents.

Each party will publish a manifesto and – at least at the Local Elections – residents will vote for the package that they most favour.

It almost beggars belief that the draft timetable for the CC specifies the 6 weeks leading up to the elections on May 7th as the period when “written submissions” will be invited.

Electric buses

Successful Park and Ride electric buses

 

Work should have been going on now for 6 months monitoring actual traffic volumes against forecasts.

At least until recently, traffic levels in the City were actually below 2008 levels. This was partly a result of the economic downturn.

Prior to that congestion levels had been stable for over 15 years.  That did not happen by accident.

It was partly due to car drivers choosing to make journeys at off peak times and partly due to Council policies such as Park and Ride and encouraging cycling/walking. 

The default position is not as some claim “do nothing”. The base position is “do more of what has been successful if the past”. Add in technology change, which should reduce unnecessary mileage, and you have the makings of a solution.

We have grave doubts about whether the Congestion Commission is the way forward.

 If it is, then its work should start in June when the political background will be much clearer.