Section 13: Sustainable Transport

[ypfadmin]

Introduction
Addressing the issues of congestion, accessibility, safety and air quality is a key part of the Local Development Framework (LDF) vision. The policies within the LDF will enable appropriate development to take place that not only widens transport choice, particularly for the more sustainable forms of transport such as public transport including buses, walking and cycling, thereby reducing the use of the private car and improving access to services and facilities, but also, minimises the need to travel. For more information on Access to Services, please refer to Section 10. Encouraging the use of sustainable transport modes, the reduction of congestion and providing accessibility for all are also key components in York’s Sustainable Community Strategy and Local Transport Plan 2006-2011 (LTP2), both of which the LDF supports.

To download Section 13: Sustainable Transport for review click here

Question 13
This section raises a range of key issues. Using the response form provided, please tell us what you think of the Council’s preferred approach to sustainable transport. Please feel free to give any comments you consider appropriate but in particular:

a) Do you feel that this section adequately supports sustainable forms of transport to reduce traffic congestion and address other key transport issues in York?

Please comment on Section 13: Sustainable Transport using the reply button below.

[Simon-DSP Architects]

York has a good record in taking a leading role on the park and ride but it needs to go further. Why not let people park in these areas on a longer term at the moment if you leave your car over night you get fined!! Also lets reward hotels for using the service instead of attracting more cars into the city.

Commercial traffic

If we can reduce the rush hour by dissuading deliveries during the rush hours would be start. Car sharing schemes should recieve the support of the city. But if we could get a central hub for deliveries then take them into the city in an organised way on green transport then this would be a model for everyone to copy. We could even utilise the river more it is a great transport link which we hardly use.

[SteveCarney]

(1)The section does not offer any reasons why congestion is occuring, nor does it offer a definition of the term sustainable transport. Certainly, buses and lorries are the biggest polluters of air in a city yet are we to prefer them to cars in order to solve congestion problems?
Could congestion be relieved by more efficient traffic flow management, eg, different signal light strategies, or one-way systems? There is a real danger that without understanding the causes of congestion the problem would not be solved. On what traffic studies are the recommendations in the LDF based? Are these studies up to date and how have the studies been amended to reflect the growth in traffic from the proposed LDF development locations? Without a thorough basis for understanding the traffic flows through the City,ie, what trips people are making and why, then the proposals might not be solving the problem. Even worse, if it is perceived that a huge tranche of Government money is required in order to execute these "solutions" and this is not forthcoming we will be stuck with an ever-growing problem.

(2) The pursuit of a light railway system that uses both existing lines and new lines is to be recommended.

(3) This should be done in conjuction with the opening up of the derelict land adjacent to the station and used, as said in the report, as a transport hub. The land-lock issues are not unsurmountable.

(4) Using the river as means of getting in and out of the river should be investigated. Park-and-sail facilities could be provided both upstream and downstream.

(5) The report says that objection has been raised against dualling of the bypass but it does not say on what grounds. Again, traffic studies would show if this would work or not, over and above any individual's opinions.

(6) The report lies towards attempting to solve existing problems rather than providing a positive healthy transport network which recognises people's wishes to move in and out and around the city.

(7) The promotion of green corridors that promote walking and cycling are not given any consideration.

(8) The report does not say why the chosen development locations have been given preference over others nor does it consider the traffic impact they might have. Can we say why these locations have been chosen and who will be the major beneficiaries of such a choice?

(9) The larger buses currently supported by the Council are often the cause of major traffic problems in the City and yet for the main remain largely empty. The bus companies should not be allowed to dictate Council policy or solutions.