The Executive of the City Council met on Tuesday 17th of March and considered a report prepared by the Highways Department on the feasibility of building a village by-pass as the Terry's site is developed. The report stated the following:
"The report responded to each of the points in the Council motion and discussed the wider implications associated with the proposed link road. It described the provision of two sections of link road, from Tadcaster Road to Bishopthorpe Road, at a cost of £6.1m. The results of traffic modelling suggested that there would be some reduction of traffic flows on Tadcaster Road but that the main benefit would come from the redistribution of traffic flowing through Bishopthorpe. It was noted that further work would be necessary to improve the punctuality of the no. 11 bus and that cycle connections could be introduced to reduce the traffic implications and increase access to the new Terry's development. However, the consideration of York's Green Belt would make it difficult to support the proposal in planning terms."
Following the above the Executive took the following decision:
"That the contents of the report be noted and that Officers be instructed to cease any further work on this proposal."
So there you have it, potential traffic problems in Bishopthorpe seem to be of little importance to the City Council's Cabinet.
It has been stated that following a "Survey" little support for such a by-pass was forthcoming, however this so called survey was not conducted by the Council and no statistics on such a survey have been published.
I am still firmly of the opinion that the only way the village can be protected from traffic chaos once the Terry's site is developed is the construction of the by-pass.
A possible spin off from a by-pass was the potential for much needed football fields to serve Bishopthorpe being created alongside.
I have no doubt there will be those people who will rejoice at the decision, there are those people who politicised my efforts to campaign for a by-pass, so at least some some people will be content, I suspect there are many more who like me are very disappointed at the decision..
The loss of a greenfield was in my opinion a small price to pay to preserve the safety of the village and possibly provide much needed football fields.
Time will tell who was on the right lines and in a way I hope my fears of traffic mayhem in Bishopthorpe will prove to be unfounded, but I doubt it.
"The report responded to each of the points in the Council motion and discussed the wider implications associated with the proposed link road. It described the provision of two sections of link road, from Tadcaster Road to Bishopthorpe Road, at a cost of £6.1m. The results of traffic modelling suggested that there would be some reduction of traffic flows on Tadcaster Road but that the main benefit would come from the redistribution of traffic flowing through Bishopthorpe. It was noted that further work would be necessary to improve the punctuality of the no. 11 bus and that cycle connections could be introduced to reduce the traffic implications and increase access to the new Terry's development. However, the consideration of York's Green Belt would make it difficult to support the proposal in planning terms."
Following the above the Executive took the following decision:
"That the contents of the report be noted and that Officers be instructed to cease any further work on this proposal."
So there you have it, potential traffic problems in Bishopthorpe seem to be of little importance to the City Council's Cabinet.
It has been stated that following a "Survey" little support for such a by-pass was forthcoming, however this so called survey was not conducted by the Council and no statistics on such a survey have been published.
I am still firmly of the opinion that the only way the village can be protected from traffic chaos once the Terry's site is developed is the construction of the by-pass.
A possible spin off from a by-pass was the potential for much needed football fields to serve Bishopthorpe being created alongside.
I have no doubt there will be those people who will rejoice at the decision, there are those people who politicised my efforts to campaign for a by-pass, so at least some some people will be content, I suspect there are many more who like me are very disappointed at the decision..
The loss of a greenfield was in my opinion a small price to pay to preserve the safety of the village and possibly provide much needed football fields.
Time will tell who was on the right lines and in a way I hope my fears of traffic mayhem in Bishopthorpe will prove to be unfounded, but I doubt it.
John
While York & District Sports Federation was wound-up nearly 12 months ago, as its former Secretary I feel reasonably confident that when still operational, if you had canvassed YDSF's support for this new route then you would, most likely, have found it.
For various reasons, football issues decreased in relevance to YDSF, but both the Assistant Director of York's former Leisure Dept, now part of 'Lifelong Learning & Leisure' ...and a key member of his staff, were closely tied to YDSF, so it was kept fully versed about Bishopthorpe FC's attempts to source facilities both in & around the village ...and in a nearby village, actually beyond CYC's remit. So we knew about that village's reluctance to play host, well, to enable Bishopthorpe's footballers to develop facilities, within its patch.
So, all things being equal, if you could demonstrate with CERTAINTY that the provision of decent football pitches & changing facilities would be part of the deal, in your attempt to see a Bishopthorpe ringroad built, then you would -surely- have seen YDSF's willing support.
While I have only read the media coverage of the Exec's decision, so am moved to express my pleasure that its Members have now learned to ask, perhaps even establish, the cost-effectiveness of proposals coming to it ...we will still agree that its Members have taken an inordinately long time in achieving this mindset. We only need to remember the debacle concerning its proposed Hungate premises, to have a handle on that credibility issue!
On the other hand, I would be interested to learn if its decision NOT to support your proposal either took ANY account of the proposed Physical, recreational & Health benefits that these proposed enhanced sports facilities would provide Bishopthorpe's residents in future years. Was this part of the equation presented by Officers? Or did all concerned either simply disregard it as a relevant factor? Or perhaps they believed it would not, or could not, stick as a firm proposal?
While Sport England's regional office in Leeds is a statutory consultee on York's planning development proposals, was it consulted about this particular transport proposal?
Given the broader Health issues, then was the Health Trust's management consulted?
I would suggest that Bishopthorpe's residents would benefit, as well as be better informed, from having these outstanding queries clarified.
Regards
Nick Blitz