Support welcomed

York Press: Support welcomed Support welcomed

I was pleased to note the realistic support by Coun Any D’Agorne (Letters, January 22) for my appraisal of suggested future changes to the A1237.

It is incumbent on the other local politicians who were photographed with him to understand that no one can ever deliver an urban car owner’s paradise.

Trying to build one’s way out of traffic congestion has been proved time and again not to work. Our council’s transport planners must look decades ahead and tender advice which, if followed now, is the only realistic way to avoid eventual gridlock.

The A1237 proposals must be accompanied by full public domain scrutiny, and include a realistic assessment of future induced and diverted journeys. York’s local transport plan seeks to reduce car dependency and must not be undermined.

Ian Foster (Letters, January 22) interpreted my last letter as suggesting that every time fresh tarmac appears residents will dash out and buy another car to drive along it. Not so. Many will simply use their existing vehicles for more journeys.

Paul Hepworth, Windmill Rise, York.

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:55am Sat 25 Jan 14

sheps lad says...

Many will use their existing vehicles for more journeys? Paul the days of motoring for pleasure are long gone, despite your predictions and gloom ridden forecasts we are not likely to all get on our bikes!
Many will use their existing vehicles for more journeys? Paul the days of motoring for pleasure are long gone, despite your predictions and gloom ridden forecasts we are not likely to all get on our bikes! sheps lad

12:55pm Sat 25 Jan 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I bet you are glad of the support Paul as support for your gridlock theory will be thin on the ground. As you have trotted out the same old arguments once again in your letter I suppose it gives me an opportunity to trot out again some of the things the council have said in reports regarding the effects of their current anti car policies :-

YCC Low Emission Strategy Oct 2012 says: -
“Traffic levels in the city have been reduced 2002 to 2005.
Peak period traffic levels have remained stable since 2006.”
“NO2 ug/m2 (pollution in York) increases 2005 to 2010
Inside AQMA 33 to 49” = 48% pollution increase.
“Outside AQMA 27 to 36” = 33% pollution increase.
“After an initial decline in NO2 concentrations between 2002 and 2005, concentrations of NO2 have since risen year on year in York, a trend that must be reversed. The main, but not sole factor, are traffic related emissions, which give rise to almost three quarters of the NO2 arising in some congested areas of the city.”

“Buses, Coaches, HGV, NO2 contribution = 38%. Percentage of traffic = 5.54%
Cars, Taxis, Motorcycles, NO2 contribution = 27%. Percentage of traffic = 84.9%
This study indicates that NOx emissions from diesel vehicles, particularly buses and HGVs are probably one of the main reasons why York has so far failed to meet the air quality objective for NO2 despite steps taken in AQAP2”

So it would appear that we are not heading for gridlock as we now have a lower volume of traffic (although we do have more council made congestion) and that buses are one of the main contributors to pollution and I bet that pollution figure does not take into account the additional pollution caused by removing bus laybys and installing bus gates and lanes which result in stop start traffic using 400% more fuel to get moving again.
I bet you are glad of the support Paul as support for your gridlock theory will be thin on the ground. As you have trotted out the same old arguments once again in your letter I suppose it gives me an opportunity to trot out again some of the things the council have said in reports regarding the effects of their current anti car policies :- YCC Low Emission Strategy Oct 2012 says: - “Traffic levels in the city have been reduced 2002 to 2005. Peak period traffic levels have remained stable since 2006.” “NO2 ug/m2 (pollution in York) increases 2005 to 2010 Inside AQMA 33 to 49” = 48% pollution increase. “Outside AQMA 27 to 36” = 33% pollution increase. “After an initial decline in NO2 concentrations between 2002 and 2005, concentrations of NO2 have since risen year on year in York, a trend that must be reversed. The main, but not sole factor, are traffic related emissions, which give rise to almost three quarters of the NO2 arising in some congested areas of the city.” “Buses, Coaches, HGV, NO2 contribution = 38%. Percentage of traffic = 5.54% Cars, Taxis, Motorcycles, NO2 contribution = 27%. Percentage of traffic = 84.9% This study indicates that NOx emissions from diesel vehicles, particularly buses and HGVs are probably one of the main reasons why York has so far failed to meet the air quality objective for NO2 despite steps taken in AQAP2” So it would appear that we are not heading for gridlock as we now have a lower volume of traffic (although we do have more council made congestion) and that buses are one of the main contributors to pollution and I bet that pollution figure does not take into account the additional pollution caused by removing bus laybys and installing bus gates and lanes which result in stop start traffic using 400% more fuel to get moving again. strangebuttrue?

12:46am Sun 26 Jan 14

Magicman! says...

Letters like this really annoy me. Yes, car dependance does need to go down - but go and tell that to the supermarkets who build their premises and put the bus stop half a mile down the other end of their car park, and only fit 6 cycle parking spaces in a far unlit and uncovered corner of the car park; or go and tell it to the management of the Monks Cross shopping centre, where the bus lane subsided 3 years ago and yet the management outright refuse to pay out to fix it - implying cars are more important to them than bus users, also backed up by the fact every time the car park is snowed over they will clear the car park and dump all the snow on the cycle lane.

The bigger picture is that we need less cars in York city centre, and getting the A1237 dualled will deliver that. A lot of cars shortcut through the city centre because the current A1237 is crap.


As for buses being a big contributory factor to pollution in York, this is already being tackled. Take a look on the Flikr site and you will see pictures of 6 fully-electric Optare Versa single decker buses which First York has purchased for use along Poppleton Road; in addition there are 5 ex-London Hybrid buses due to York after they've been refurbished (dated to 2008)... meanwhile Transdev is awaiting delivery of a fully electric minibus after it's been fixed at Optare to rectify some faults that were discovered, and even the council have got 2 fully electric minibuses due for a route to and from Derwenthorpe. And looking at the latest figures from the Government, First York has received a grant for an additional 6 single decker fully electric buses (12 total), whilst Transdev has received funds to convert an existing diesel vehicle into a fully electric one... once all these come, there will be 16 fully electric buses, or 21 'eco' buses in York. And although not considered 'green' as such, First York are currently receiving some 2005 dated single decker buses to replace some of the 2001 dated fleet, the 2005 ones having a slightly more efficient engine.
As for removing bus laybys, frankly drivers only have themselves to blame for that - had they, when a bus was indicating to pull out from a layby stop, given a flash and let the bus pull out, then those laybys would still be there... instead car after car after car sail past whilst the bus can wait there for several minutes waiting to pull out because everybody in the cars is thinking "I don't wanna be behind that bus"; this made the buses run late, so the council stepped in and removed the laybys to make the buses run more smoothly.
Bus lanes are needed when a road has too much private motor vehicle traffic on it for a bus to run to time - in a city like York, roadspace is precious: and so a metal box that takes the space of no more than 3 cars (bumper to bumper) on the road but carries between 30-80 people is going to get priority over three cars all carrying only one person. If it is not compulsory to make your entire journey in a car then use an alternative method of travel, and if it is compulsory to use your car for the whole journey then you might just find your journey is a fair bit quicker once all those non-compulsory car journeys have disappeared from the road ahead.
As for bus gates - personally I don't like the traffic light arrangement, whereby the normal running lane has a constant green whilst the bus lane has a constant red - then a bus shows up, has to wait on the stop line, then the traffic lights switch over for the bus to go, then a few seconds where the normal lane of traffic is waiting after the bus has gone but there is still a red light before it goes green... I think it's a waste of electricity powering the lights and an inefficient use of fuel... BUT the alternative wouldn't work - the alternative is to have a 'Give Way' sign and give way markings at the end of the normal traffic lane where the bus lane merges with it, so that the bus still has priority; it wouldn't work because there are a number of drivers who would simply ignore the Give Way direction because they wouldn't want to be behind a bus. It is the actions of an utterly selfish minority of motorists who make things far more regulated and enforced for everybody else who uses the roads because of the way they have driven.... aiming dislike at buses for example is a bad aim, because the buses themselves aren't what has caused the problem.
Letters like this really annoy me. Yes, car dependance does need to go down - but go and tell that to the supermarkets who build their premises and put the bus stop half a mile down the other end of their car park, and only fit 6 cycle parking spaces in a far unlit and uncovered corner of the car park; or go and tell it to the management of the Monks Cross shopping centre, where the bus lane subsided 3 years ago and yet the management outright refuse to pay out to fix it - implying cars are more important to them than bus users, also backed up by the fact every time the car park is snowed over they will clear the car park and dump all the snow on the cycle lane. The bigger picture is that we need less cars in York city centre, and getting the A1237 dualled will deliver that. A lot of cars shortcut through the city centre because the current A1237 is crap. As for buses being a big contributory factor to pollution in York, this is already being tackled. Take a look on the Flikr site and you will see pictures of 6 fully-electric Optare Versa single decker buses which First York has purchased for use along Poppleton Road; in addition there are 5 ex-London Hybrid buses due to York after they've been refurbished (dated to 2008)... meanwhile Transdev is awaiting delivery of a fully electric minibus after it's been fixed at Optare to rectify some faults that were discovered, and even the council have got 2 fully electric minibuses due for a route to and from Derwenthorpe. And looking at the latest figures from the Government, First York has received a grant for an additional 6 single decker fully electric buses (12 total), whilst Transdev has received funds to convert an existing diesel vehicle into a fully electric one... once all these come, there will be 16 fully electric buses, or 21 'eco' buses in York. And although not considered 'green' as such, First York are currently receiving some 2005 dated single decker buses to replace some of the 2001 dated fleet, the 2005 ones having a slightly more efficient engine. As for removing bus laybys, frankly drivers only have themselves to blame for that - had they, when a bus was indicating to pull out from a layby stop, given a flash and let the bus pull out, then those laybys would still be there... instead car after car after car sail past whilst the bus can wait there for several minutes waiting to pull out because everybody in the cars is thinking "I don't wanna be behind that bus"; this made the buses run late, so the council stepped in and removed the laybys to make the buses run more smoothly. Bus lanes are needed when a road has too much private motor vehicle traffic on it for a bus to run to time - in a city like York, roadspace is precious: and so a metal box that takes the space of no more than 3 cars (bumper to bumper) on the road but carries between 30-80 people is going to get priority over three cars all carrying only one person. If it is not compulsory to make your entire journey in a car then use an alternative method of travel, and if it is compulsory to use your car for the whole journey then you might just find your journey is a fair bit quicker once all those non-compulsory car journeys have disappeared from the road ahead. As for bus gates - personally I don't like the traffic light arrangement, whereby the normal running lane has a constant green whilst the bus lane has a constant red - then a bus shows up, has to wait on the stop line, then the traffic lights switch over for the bus to go, then a few seconds where the normal lane of traffic is waiting after the bus has gone but there is still a red light before it goes green... I think it's a waste of electricity powering the lights and an inefficient use of fuel... BUT the alternative wouldn't work - the alternative is to have a 'Give Way' sign and give way markings at the end of the normal traffic lane where the bus lane merges with it, so that the bus still has priority; it wouldn't work because there are a number of drivers who would simply ignore the Give Way direction because they wouldn't want to be behind a bus. It is the actions of an utterly selfish minority of motorists who make things far more regulated and enforced for everybody else who uses the roads because of the way they have driven.... aiming dislike at buses for example is a bad aim, because the buses themselves aren't what has caused the problem. Magicman!

1:23pm Sun 26 Jan 14

strangebuttrue? says...

they would not want to be behind a bus because they know that the council has configured the road such that now once behind you will be held up every time it stops.
You need to think about what is changing peoples behaviour as I remember a tine when letting a bus out was not a problem as you would be passing it again in 300 yards unlike now when you will be stuck behind it whilst it belches out it's poisonous eye stinging pollution for the next 15 minutes in which time you could have completed your journey and task and been on the return leg without adding your own stop start pollution and expensive wear and tear to the mix.
The bus gate on Boroughbridge Road does not show green all the time for the normal traffic lane. It randomly changes to red, even when there are no buses, more so at peak times it would appear, just to cause a bit more inconvenience, pollution, wear and tear, and frustration and anger to a law abiding residents car journey. That and the narrowing of the road to fit in the bus lane which causes the normal traffic to have to stop and start every time a vehicle turns right. It all adds up and I do not believe any of this is incidental or accidental.
they would not want to be behind a bus because they know that the council has configured the road such that now once behind you will be held up every time it stops. You need to think about what is changing peoples behaviour as I remember a tine when letting a bus out was not a problem as you would be passing it again in 300 yards unlike now when you will be stuck behind it whilst it belches out it's poisonous eye stinging pollution for the next 15 minutes in which time you could have completed your journey and task and been on the return leg without adding your own stop start pollution and expensive wear and tear to the mix. The bus gate on Boroughbridge Road does not show green all the time for the normal traffic lane. It randomly changes to red, even when there are no buses, more so at peak times it would appear, just to cause a bit more inconvenience, pollution, wear and tear, and frustration and anger to a law abiding residents car journey. That and the narrowing of the road to fit in the bus lane which causes the normal traffic to have to stop and start every time a vehicle turns right. It all adds up and I do not believe any of this is incidental or accidental. strangebuttrue?

9:02am Mon 27 Jan 14

The Great Buda says...

Nice attempt to revise history in the last paragraph Paul. Trying to change your stance now that you've been made to look silly?
Nice attempt to revise history in the last paragraph Paul. Trying to change your stance now that you've been made to look silly? The Great Buda

11:42am Mon 27 Jan 14

inthesticks says...

Agree totally with Magicman.
Paul, the fact that Cllr A D from York Greens backs your theory is nothing to shout about and certainly doesn`t make you right.
We don`t want a car users paradise and your choice of words is antagonistic once again. We just want to be able to get to and from work, drop kids at school first, get 6 bags of shopping from supermarket etc.
The fact that people use cars more than buses and bikes should tell you that;
Buses don`t run where people need to go,
Buses are too expensive,
Not everyone is physically able to cycle,
Some have to carry goods/children not possible by bike or bus,
We don`t all live within cycling/walking distance of work like you and Cllr AD,
Many don`t have a bus service to use at all.
If it was cheaper/easier/more convenient for people to cycle and bus everywhere then people would be doing it.
Agree totally with Magicman. Paul, the fact that Cllr A D from York Greens backs your theory is nothing to shout about and certainly doesn`t make you right. We don`t want a car users paradise and your choice of words is antagonistic once again. We just want to be able to get to and from work, drop kids at school first, get 6 bags of shopping from supermarket etc. The fact that people use cars more than buses and bikes should tell you that; Buses don`t run where people need to go, Buses are too expensive, Not everyone is physically able to cycle, Some have to carry goods/children not possible by bike or bus, We don`t all live within cycling/walking distance of work like you and Cllr AD, Many don`t have a bus service to use at all. If it was cheaper/easier/more convenient for people to cycle and bus everywhere then people would be doing it. inthesticks

4:16pm Mon 27 Jan 14

Dr Robert says...

Oh dear Mr Hepworth, things can only get worse, just wait until Labour and the Greens get their way and build thousands of new houses on the British Sugar site along with Germany Beck and Derwenthorpe, nearly forgot the Teardrop site, there will be cars everywhere, you have seen nothing yet.
Oh dear Mr Hepworth, things can only get worse, just wait until Labour and the Greens get their way and build thousands of new houses on the British Sugar site along with Germany Beck and Derwenthorpe, nearly forgot the Teardrop site, there will be cars everywhere, you have seen nothing yet. Dr Robert

6:08pm Mon 27 Jan 14

Jonthan says...

Dr Robert wrote:
Oh dear Mr Hepworth, things can only get worse, just wait until Labour and the Greens get their way and build thousands of new houses on the British Sugar site along with Germany Beck and Derwenthorpe, nearly forgot the Teardrop site, there will be cars everywhere, you have seen nothing yet.
I would have thought that houses built on those sites, close to bus routes, would generate less traffic than the same number of houses built in villages or isolated areas.
[quote][p][bold]Dr Robert[/bold] wrote: Oh dear Mr Hepworth, things can only get worse, just wait until Labour and the Greens get their way and build thousands of new houses on the British Sugar site along with Germany Beck and Derwenthorpe, nearly forgot the Teardrop site, there will be cars everywhere, you have seen nothing yet.[/p][/quote]I would have thought that houses built on those sites, close to bus routes, would generate less traffic than the same number of houses built in villages or isolated areas. Jonthan

7:54pm Mon 27 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

Jonthan wrote:
Dr Robert wrote:
Oh dear Mr Hepworth, things can only get worse, just wait until Labour and the Greens get their way and build thousands of new houses on the British Sugar site along with Germany Beck and Derwenthorpe, nearly forgot the Teardrop site, there will be cars everywhere, you have seen nothing yet.
I would have thought that houses built on those sites, close to bus routes, would generate less traffic than the same number of houses built in villages or isolated areas.
What? So people living in these new houses won't use a car? All those living in these new houses will use the bus? I really don't think so, but you can keep dreaming, like pp aka Paul Hepworth, of waking up one day in your utopian world, while the rest of live in the real world.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dr Robert[/bold] wrote: Oh dear Mr Hepworth, things can only get worse, just wait until Labour and the Greens get their way and build thousands of new houses on the British Sugar site along with Germany Beck and Derwenthorpe, nearly forgot the Teardrop site, there will be cars everywhere, you have seen nothing yet.[/p][/quote]I would have thought that houses built on those sites, close to bus routes, would generate less traffic than the same number of houses built in villages or isolated areas.[/p][/quote]What? So people living in these new houses won't use a car? All those living in these new houses will use the bus? I really don't think so, but you can keep dreaming, like pp aka Paul Hepworth, of waking up one day in your utopian world, while the rest of live in the real world. Igiveinthen

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree