IS a congestion commission the best way to tackle the problem of York's traffic-choked streets? STEPHEN LEWIS reports.
LABOUR proposals to set up a 'congestion commission' - headed by a panel of independent experts on £400 a day - to tackle the gridlock on York's narrow streets look likely to be postponed until after the May elections.
Opposition councillors overruled the ruling Labour group at a meeting earlier this week and referred the proposals back to Cabinet, with a recommendation they should be deferred until after the election.
Whether the Labour-run Cabinet, which meets on March 3, will accept that recommendation or still try to find a way of pushing ahead with the commission remains to be seen.
Either way, questions about the proposals remain.
How bad is congestion in York? Would a congestion commission be the best way to tackle York's gridlock? And what appetite would there be for a congestion commission after May if the political balance of the council is different then?
Here, we try to answer some of those questions...
How bad is congestion in York?
To anyone stuck in rush hour traffic jams on the outer ring road or at major city-centre junctions, York's traffic can often seem a nightmare. It can easily reduce perfectly reasonable drivers to screaming frustration.
It might surprise you, therefore, to learn that a council document prepared in 2013 to support the draft local plan suggests that congestion in the city might not actually be quite as bad as many of us think.
Yes, congestion levels are high, the local plan 'Transport Implications' report conceded - especially on the inner ring road, northern outer ring road, and key roads into the centre.
The document relies largely on figures gathered for the 2001 Census - admittedly, not that up to date. But it suggested that there were 70,000 car, bus or lorry journeys made within the city every day, with a further 22,000 journeys into York and 17,000 out.
That sounds like an awful lot in such a small city. But the document also revealed that, since 1998/99, there had been a slight fall in traffic levels in York. "More recent data from automatic traffic counters in the city show this slight downward trend continuing," it said.
What's more, the average delay during the morning rush-hour caused by congestion is just 3 minutes 19 seconds, the document conceded - the ninth smallest figure out of 28 comparable local authorities. "It could be argued that congestion in York is not excessive at present, although this may be contrary to public opinion," the document concluded.
The key words there, however, may be 'at present'. The draft local plan also envisages 900 or so new homes being built in York every year for the next decade and more: and new homes will, inevitably, mean more cars, more congestion, more delays, and more traffic fumes.
A case study in the traffic implications document tries to model what impact the increase in traffic might have. It starts with a 'base' case of 32,500 car journeys per hour in and around York in 2014/15, and suggests that by 2029/30, this could have increased to nearly 46,000.
Average speeds, meanwhile, would fall from 29mph now to 22mph - with the amount of time spent sitting stuck in traffic jams almost tripling.
How would a congestion commission work?
The commission would have probably nine members - four of them elected councillors, the remainder appointed traffic experts who would be paid £400 a day for the two days a month they would be expected to work. The commission would be headed by an independent chairman.
A Cabinet briefing note written by Sarah Tanburn, the city council's interim director of environmental services, recommended appointing the civil engineer and economist Terry Hill. No other recommendations were made.
The commission would sit for two days a month for 20 months or so. Its brief would be to consider ways to tackle congestion in York. All options would be on the table, (including, presumably, the possibility of congestion charging), but with a particular focus on trying to encourage more people to leave their cars at home, managing parking, and looking at transport networks.
The cabinet briefing note makes clear that having a commission made up mainly of independent experts rather than councillors would allow longer-term strategies to be considered - and also more 'difficult' transport solutions that may not be popular (again, presumably including congestion charging).
The commission would look at evidence (and examples of successful traffic management schemes elsewhere) to draw up a strategy for York. but it would also invite input from the people of York, in several ways:
• by inviting written submissions
• by holding public hearings, at which members of the public and interest groups would submit evidence, and selected respondents would be asked to speak
• by holding workshops
• through a 'citizen's jury' in which a small group of York people (between 12 and 30) who represented a range of opinions would be asked to review evidence and make suggestions. The jury would meet over several days.
Ultimately, after a period of about 20 months, the commission would submit a written report to the city council.
The total estimated cost of the commission would be £135,000. This would include the £400-a-day payments to the expert commissioners, plus £50,000 for specialist financial expertise, £15,000 for the citizens jury, plus other costs.
If the proposals are deferred until after the election, would there be the political will to reintroduce them?
That would almost certainly depend on the make-up of the council. Labour and - with some reservations - the Greens are in favour of the commission: the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are more sceptical.
Here's what the parties have to say:
Labour
David Levene
"The proposal for a Congestion Commission was simple: to make a commitment to come together, listen to what the public and leaders in the field have to say, and get to grips with congestion in this city," said Labour's cabinet member for transport, Cllr David Levene.
"Unfortunately, it seems only Labour are willing to make that commitment to York residents. It's disappointing that rather than engage and contribute their ideas, the opposition parties have chosen to delay, ignore the air quality dangers and huge economic cost of congestion, and walk away from a genuine offer to work across parties for the benefit of the city and its residents."
Conservatives
Chris Steward
York already has an excellent record on tackling congestion and encouraging people to use public transport and walk and cycle more, says Conservative group leader Chris Steward. The congestion commission is expensive and unnecessary - a gimmick to divert attention from the Lendal Bridge debacle.
"We continue to support further work on this but believe a Congestion Commission, the idea for which the former council leader admits came from his desire to take Labour’s Lendal Bridge debacle out of the news, is not the right thing with an election on the way and it is also too costly. In just a few weeks time we will have a new council make up and it seems pointless to seek to bind a future administration, when parties can instead set out their vision in manifestos and let York residents choose what they support.
"A more modest happy medium between a conventional councillor-led scrutiny review and the £400 per day experts proposed in the commission papers is likely to be a more sensible way forward."
Liberal Democrats
Ann Reid
Labour’s botched Lendal Bridge trial shows the need for a cross-party effort to tackle congestion, accepts the Liberal Democrats' transport spokesperson Ann Reid.
"Labour closed Lendal Bridge without properly consulting local residents, businesses or opposition councillors. The results were disastrous with 55,000 motorists wrongly fined and only repaid after a Liberal Democrat motion forced Labour’s hand.
"A new approach is needed. However, the proposals put forward by Labour have not won cross-party support and public reaction has been decidedly mixed.
"The Labour leader says spending £135,000 on the commission is ‘not a lot of money’. But at a time when Labour is cutting funding for swimming pools and community centres they have failed to show that this cost offers value-for-money.
"It was also disappointing that key decisions, such as the appointment of a commission chair (from London), the remit, and the structure were taken without cross-party agreement or a transparent process. Meanwhile, there has been no proper engagement with the residents and businesses that actually use York’s roads every day.
"The Lib Dems want a more sensible approach to costs, direct resident and business involvement on the committee and a commitment to real outcomes. We can’t just set-up a talking shop."
Greens
Andy D'Agorne
The Greens in York have supported the idea of a congestion commission all along, says group leader Andy D'Agorne. With traffic fumes leading to an increase in pollution which is affecting people's health, something needs to be done.
"The cost is worth it, if we get a good cross section of experts involved and ensure that all the business interests and residents can contribute fully to the process. It is a small amount for a strategic piece of work compared to the millions already spent on designing junction improvements and relatively minor changes like the station frontage, (which still cant cope with the pressure of taxis pedestrians, buses and private cars competing for space)."
The Greens would, however, have liked to see the publication of a full list of experts being considered for the commission. "People like Martin Stockley who contributed to the 'Movement' aspects of Alan Simpson's York New City Beautiful report in 2010."
The Greens have their own traffic-busting proposal which they have put forward in their budget amendment: a free 'town bus' or shuttle bus to serve the station and the city centre. "In York this new 'carrot' to get people to leave their cars outside the city centre would link the station, museum, library, hospital, edge of centre stores on Foss Islands Rd, and the Barbican."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel