Help? - We have already identified other areas in Leeds where measures have been put in place to address some of the traffic issues that we face. If you are aware of any recent traffic or road safety alterations anywhere, not just in Leeds, that may have been put in place to improve life for the local community, ie 'people before traffic', and can provide a little bit of detail then drop us an email, and this of course includes HGV bans .......
HGV bans on A-class roads - Some years ago at a meeting with a senior, council highways department officer, in a local pub, the matter of HGV bans was raised, the officer, new to the post, stated that the council could not consider an HGV bans on the A639 because an HGV ban on an A-class road would set an unworkable precedent ... it was pointed out to him that he was sat less than 100yards away from the A642, an A-class road with an HGV ban! This is the same officer who has gone on to state that he (personal opinion) does not believe that any A-class roads in Leeds should have HGV bans ... there are dozens of them! If you can identify any in and around Leeds please let us know, we won't have got them all.
Tuesday 27 October 2009
Official launch 'Welcome'
A very quick welcome to those of you visiting the site as a result of the recent 'flyer' campaign. The emails and texts offering support started coming in the same day the flyers were delivered which confirms the strength of concern that exists.
If you scan through some of the earlier postings on the site you will see that guidance, regulations, and laws, are already in place to protect communities from the traffic problems blighting the area ...
surprisingly the biggest problem that we face is in getting people to register a complaint
... so if you haven't already done so simply text 'support' to 07985 991072, or email lawrrag@ymail.com typing 'support' as the subject. If you have neighbours without email or text please complain on their behalf as well (assuming that they want to of course).
Thank you for visiting, please come back from time to time to check out new content.
If you scan through some of the earlier postings on the site you will see that guidance, regulations, and laws, are already in place to protect communities from the traffic problems blighting the area ...
surprisingly the biggest problem that we face is in getting people to register a complaint
... so if you haven't already done so simply text 'support' to 07985 991072, or email lawrrag@ymail.com typing 'support' as the subject. If you have neighbours without email or text please complain on their behalf as well (assuming that they want to of course).
Thank you for visiting, please come back from time to time to check out new content.
Thursday 3 September 2009
The truth, the whole truth - or nothing like the truth?
An earlier posting (6th August) contains the following statement - The problems lie much closer to home than most people realise. Just to expand upon this a little we have dug these nuggets out of the archives:
LCC Spokesman's comments - in response to an article in the Yorkshire Evening Post, Wednesday 22 February 2006, about the concerns and the activities of LAWRRAG (see also 'Royds Russian Roulette' posting) - 1) "....the group's concerns were being taken extremely seriously but major traffic problems had yet to be found." 2) "We have asked police to carry out enforcement measures to combat a small element of speeding along the road."
LCC Spokesman's comments - in response to an article in the Yorkshire Evening Post, Wednesday 22 February 2006, about the concerns and the activities of LAWRRAG (see also 'Royds Russian Roulette' posting) - 1) "....the group's concerns were being taken extremely seriously but major traffic problems had yet to be found." 2) "We have asked police to carry out enforcement measures to combat a small element of speeding along the road."
Letter to LAWRRAG from Councillor Steve Smith 24 August 2004 - in response to complaints about HGV traffic - "Please be assured that I will be monitoring the situation on an ongoing basis with a view to achieving a significant reduction in HGV movements along the A639/A642 corridor."
Letter to local MP from Highways department 27 January 2006 - in response to concerns about increased traffic resulting from Aire Valley development link road proposal - "It is not anticipated that the A639 will increase in volume due to the construction of these roads". The writer of this letter had been present and a meeting held on 13 January 2006, with LAWRRAG representatives and senior council officers, where it was confirmed that there would be a higher volume of all types of traffic using the A639/A642 as a result of the Aire Valley development and link road!
Speed monitoring - In November 2004 the council carried out speed monitoring on the A639 and came to the conclusion that there was no excessive speeding! It was pointed out to the council that positioning the monitoring equipment within yards of a set of traffic lights would not give a true indication of average speeds. After much pressure and many months delay monitoring was again carried out, at a spot suggested by LAWRRAG. The results from this monitoring, on the same road, showed that in excess of 80% of all vehicles were speeding, this resulted in the council stating that there was a serious speeding problem!
Police liaison following speed monitoring - It was stated at a meeting held with senior council officers in December 2005 that although it was acknowledged that there was a serious speeding problem, there was only the police that could do anything about it. The council confirmed that they would liaise with the police which they eventually did in August 2006!
LAWRRAG 2004 petition - In the summer of 2004 70+ households signed a petition supporting the campaign for speed control, an HGV ban, and a crossing for Royds School, the petition was presented to the council, through the councillors - that petition was simply ignored!
Sensibly minded people might presume that council members, officers, and ward councillors would be doing everything that they could to help the community, the rate payers.
Royds Russian Roulette
September and the start of another school year, another school year without a pedestrian controlled crossing point on the A639 or A642 for Oulton and Woodlesford students walking to and from Royds School.
Following complaints from parents, supported by the School, and the Oulton Society, Leeds City Council carried out a survey and in February 2002 (yes, 2002!) confirmed that a pedestrian controlled crossing was needed and that consideration was to be given to installing flashing slow down signs close to Pennington Lane. The location of the pedestrian controlled crossing and the source of funding was confirmed to ward councillors in March 2002 - Nothing happened.
A key concern covered in the initial LAWRRAG campaign was the safety of Royds School students having to cross either the A639 or the A642, both roads acknowledged by the council as having speeding problems! LAWRRAG had the full support of the school headteacher, parents, and the local MP, however in January 2006 the council stated that following a recent survey there were insufficient numbers of people crossing by the school too satisfy the criteria for a pedestrian controlled crossing. It was pointed out to the council and the councillors that the vast majority of students cross the road before the Sports Centre, and not close by the school - this was ignored.
In response to an article about the LAWRRAG campaign in the Yorkshire Evening Post, Wednesday 22 February 2006, a council spokesman was quoted "Young people at Royds School are working with us to produce a traffic plan to identify any traffic problems that they experience on their journeys to school. We will look at all results and take any action we think is necessary." (As the parent of a 'young person' at Royds at that time the writer nor the 'young person' ever heard anything about this supposed co-operation!). Over time it was 'suggested' that LAWRRAG shouldn't involve itself with the school as the Education department and the ward councillors, Governors at the school, were working with the relevant council departments to sort this out.
In 2002 a crossing was needed, 7 years on, with a higher traffic volume and higher speeds there is still no safe crossing point. School students are encouraged to walk to and from school.
Following complaints from parents, supported by the School, and the Oulton Society, Leeds City Council carried out a survey and in February 2002 (yes, 2002!) confirmed that a pedestrian controlled crossing was needed and that consideration was to be given to installing flashing slow down signs close to Pennington Lane. The location of the pedestrian controlled crossing and the source of funding was confirmed to ward councillors in March 2002 - Nothing happened.
A key concern covered in the initial LAWRRAG campaign was the safety of Royds School students having to cross either the A639 or the A642, both roads acknowledged by the council as having speeding problems! LAWRRAG had the full support of the school headteacher, parents, and the local MP, however in January 2006 the council stated that following a recent survey there were insufficient numbers of people crossing by the school too satisfy the criteria for a pedestrian controlled crossing. It was pointed out to the council and the councillors that the vast majority of students cross the road before the Sports Centre, and not close by the school - this was ignored.
In response to an article about the LAWRRAG campaign in the Yorkshire Evening Post, Wednesday 22 February 2006, a council spokesman was quoted "Young people at Royds School are working with us to produce a traffic plan to identify any traffic problems that they experience on their journeys to school. We will look at all results and take any action we think is necessary." (As the parent of a 'young person' at Royds at that time the writer nor the 'young person' ever heard anything about this supposed co-operation!). Over time it was 'suggested' that LAWRRAG shouldn't involve itself with the school as the Education department and the ward councillors, Governors at the school, were working with the relevant council departments to sort this out.
In 2002 a crossing was needed, 7 years on, with a higher traffic volume and higher speeds there is still no safe crossing point. School students are encouraged to walk to and from school.
Thursday 6 August 2009
Leeds/Wakefield Road speed limit to rise!
Don't panic - the header is a bit of red-herring, but it could have been used some while back had the blog been in existence then. There has been no mention of an increase in the speed limit for over 12 months. It is doubtful that the simple matter of 'compensation' was ever even considered by council officers when this originally blew up.
Those new to this must wonder why the speeding problem can't quite simply be resolved - we're all aware of government campaigns - 'speed kills' etc, speed cameras seem to be everywhere (else!), getting caught travelling at 30mph above the speed limit results in an automatic ban, etc etc etc. This posting highlights some of the stumbling blocks.
In August 2006 the Department for Transport published DfT Circular 1/06 new guidance on setting local speed limits, which can be found here . Considering that the Lawrrag campaign to do something about speeding was well underway, and that the council speed monitoring figures resulted in them accepting that there was a 'serious problem', one might wonder why a senior member of staff within the Leeds City Council Highways Department thought it acceptable to write to Colin Challen MP stating that new guidance gave the authority the right to increase the speed limit(?)
The document is available for all to see, and the very first line of the Introduction to the Dft Circular reads "Balancing the need to travel with the need to improve quality of life is a key objective of the Department for Transport." with one of the Key points being "Traffic authorities set 'local speed limits' in situations where local needs and considerations deem it desirable for drivers to adopt a speeed which is different from the national speed limit. Local speed limits could be reduced or increased, depending upon the conditions and evidence." Clear, concise, and unambiguous? It is interesting that the council officer didn't also suggest to our MP that the speed limit could be reduced.
With regard to the Police, a spokesman has stated that in their opinion a 50mph limit would be a more suitable. The Police have also stated that as there are so few accidents, Leeds/Wakefield Road is low priority insofar as dealing with speeding goes!
The problems lie much closer to home than most people realise!
Those new to this must wonder why the speeding problem can't quite simply be resolved - we're all aware of government campaigns - 'speed kills' etc, speed cameras seem to be everywhere (else!), getting caught travelling at 30mph above the speed limit results in an automatic ban, etc etc etc. This posting highlights some of the stumbling blocks.
In August 2006 the Department for Transport published DfT Circular 1/06 new guidance on setting local speed limits, which can be found here . Considering that the Lawrrag campaign to do something about speeding was well underway, and that the council speed monitoring figures resulted in them accepting that there was a 'serious problem', one might wonder why a senior member of staff within the Leeds City Council Highways Department thought it acceptable to write to Colin Challen MP stating that new guidance gave the authority the right to increase the speed limit(?)
The document is available for all to see, and the very first line of the Introduction to the Dft Circular reads "Balancing the need to travel with the need to improve quality of life is a key objective of the Department for Transport." with one of the Key points being "Traffic authorities set 'local speed limits' in situations where local needs and considerations deem it desirable for drivers to adopt a speeed which is different from the national speed limit. Local speed limits could be reduced or increased, depending upon the conditions and evidence." Clear, concise, and unambiguous? It is interesting that the council officer didn't also suggest to our MP that the speed limit could be reduced.
With regard to the Police, a spokesman has stated that in their opinion a 50mph limit would be a more suitable. The Police have also stated that as there are so few accidents, Leeds/Wakefield Road is low priority insofar as dealing with speeding goes!
The problems lie much closer to home than most people realise!
HGV Ban hypocrisy?
It is acknowledged that the unacceptable increase in HGV traffic along Leeds/Wakefield Road is directly related to the industrial and distribution developments in Stourton, and Cross Green, and that in turn this growth is directly related to the construction of the M1-A1 link, now a few years old. Without the M1-A1 link the scale of industrial and distribution development would have been significantly reduced because of planning and highways issues.
The M1-A1 link opened up acres of developable land, and what better location for industrial and distribution developments than right next to the M1 motorway with direct links to both the M62 and the A1 - no real argument.
Interesting then to consider the justification for the M1-A1 Link, Lofthouse - Bramham, that can be found here Roads review - what role for trunk roads in England?
........to relieve congestion, improve the environment and enhance road safety on the local road network by removing through traffic, particularly heavy goods vehicles, from unsuitable roads in Central and East Leeds and to provide additional capacity to meet future predicted traffic growth.
The M1-A1 link opened up acres of developable land, and what better location for industrial and distribution developments than right next to the M1 motorway with direct links to both the M62 and the A1 - no real argument.
Interesting then to consider the justification for the M1-A1 Link, Lofthouse - Bramham, that can be found here Roads review - what role for trunk roads in England?
........to relieve congestion, improve the environment and enhance road safety on the local road network by removing through traffic, particularly heavy goods vehicles, from unsuitable roads in Central and East Leeds and to provide additional capacity to meet future predicted traffic growth.
Meeting with Shadow Transport Minister
On Monday 3rd August, a small delegation of local residents had a brief and informal meeting with Alec Shelbrooke, Conservative parliamentary candidate for this area, and Robert Goodwill MP, Shadow Transport Minister. The meeting was held in a lay-by on Leeds Road and above the noise of the traffic, and within feet of speeding HGV's, the concerns of local residents were outlined to Robert Goodwill who listened and commented understandingly.
Special thanks must be given to Alec Shelbrooke for arranging the meeting and for contributing positively on our behalf.
Special thanks must be given to Alec Shelbrooke for arranging the meeting and for contributing positively on our behalf.
Monday 20 July 2009
Map – HGV Route
Given the content of the planning policy guideline - 29 June 2009 entry, the government white paper on transport - 14 July 2009 entry, and the fact that two of the major 24/7 HGV operators in Stourton have already confirmed that it would not effect their operations if there was an HGV ban along Leeds/Wakefield Road, the question remains – Why doesn’t the council, or our councillors, support the calls for an HGV ban, full or night-time?
Tuesday 14 July 2009
Leeds City Council and freight transport
Do officers within the council understand just how detrimental the noise,vibration, and disturbance from HGV traffic can be? Well yes they do actually! -
In November 2005, when we were still trying to get the council to listen to us, a highways department report (Design and Cost Report -Capital Scheme No: 01881 - Agenda Item No 1653/2005) was put to the council Director of City Services, supporting an HGV ban on Cross Green Lane, Cross Green. One of the reasons for the HGV ban was:
2.4 Many operators run 24 hours a day 7 days a week and so there is no respite for the residents.
Section 4.1 confirms the support of the local councillors.
At the time correspondence was sent from us to the leader of the council, Andrew Carter, asking why we weren't regarded with the same concern. We'll let you know the answer when we receive a reply!
In November 2005, when we were still trying to get the council to listen to us, a highways department report (Design and Cost Report -Capital Scheme No: 01881 - Agenda Item No 1653/2005) was put to the council Director of City Services, supporting an HGV ban on Cross Green Lane, Cross Green. One of the reasons for the HGV ban was:
2.4 Many operators run 24 hours a day 7 days a week and so there is no respite for the residents.
Section 4.1 confirms the support of the local councillors.
At the time correspondence was sent from us to the leader of the council, Andrew Carter, asking why we weren't regarded with the same concern. We'll let you know the answer when we receive a reply!
The Government and freight transport
The Government's The future of transport - White Paper CM6234 is one of the lead national strategy documents relative to transport, if you want to check it out click here.
'Chapter 8, Freight: moving goods more efficiently' contains this section:
Local and regional regulation - we will encourage local authorities to consider how their various regulatory powers that relate to freight transport (traffic and parking regulations, night-time bans, planning powers and the use of planning conditions) can be co-ordinated to make life easier for businesses while protecting the interests of local people. Freight policy also needs to be considered by regional bodies and we will encourage them to think strategically about freight, especially in the context of regional strategies on transport, housing and spacial development.
There is a presumption that local authorities will put people before traffic.
'Chapter 8, Freight: moving goods more efficiently' contains this section:
Local and regional regulation - we will encourage local authorities to consider how their various regulatory powers that relate to freight transport (traffic and parking regulations, night-time bans, planning powers and the use of planning conditions) can be co-ordinated to make life easier for businesses while protecting the interests of local people. Freight policy also needs to be considered by regional bodies and we will encourage them to think strategically about freight, especially in the context of regional strategies on transport, housing and spacial development.
There is a presumption that local authorities will put people before traffic.
Saturday 11 July 2009
Traffic, Property values, & Council tax
The question has been asked many times - What do we have to do to get the council to listen to the concerns of local residents? Readers will see from other postings that it is within the power of the local authority to address some of traffic problems we face, but will also see that it is as a direct result of the actions of council departments that these problems have come about! As ratepayers we are all paying for a service that we do not receive, a service that is contributing to the devaluation of our property and to a deterioration of our 'quality of life'.
For those of you that consider that last part to be too strong a claim, consider this - the current council tax bands are based upon the amount that a property might have fetched if it had been sold on the open market on 1st April 1991. It is an indisputable fact that 'traffic' impacts upon property values, the worse the traffic, the less appealing your property becomes, the less you property is worth - this is devaluation. The traffic situation has worsened significantly over the last 8 years, let alone the 18 years since 1991, and it is extremely probable that a revaluation today would put some properties in a lower council tax band. In comparative terms your property is losing value, yet you are expected to still pay the same rates - something not right there.
The good news is that the Valuation Office acknowledges that changes happen, and there are circumstances where it is in order to ask for a revaluation assessment, the list of circumstances can be found by clicking here but the section relevant to our case is:
3. If there has been physical changes in your area which could affect the value of your property.
This includes roads, and developments.
A hundred or so applications to the Valuation Office might just make the 'powers that be' sit up and take notice. Lower rateable values means loss of revenue and the probability of refunds. Money talks. Perhaps then they might start to take our claims seriously?
For those of you that consider that last part to be too strong a claim, consider this - the current council tax bands are based upon the amount that a property might have fetched if it had been sold on the open market on 1st April 1991. It is an indisputable fact that 'traffic' impacts upon property values, the worse the traffic, the less appealing your property becomes, the less you property is worth - this is devaluation. The traffic situation has worsened significantly over the last 8 years, let alone the 18 years since 1991, and it is extremely probable that a revaluation today would put some properties in a lower council tax band. In comparative terms your property is losing value, yet you are expected to still pay the same rates - something not right there.
The good news is that the Valuation Office acknowledges that changes happen, and there are circumstances where it is in order to ask for a revaluation assessment, the list of circumstances can be found by clicking here but the section relevant to our case is:
3. If there has been physical changes in your area which could affect the value of your property.
This includes roads, and developments.
A hundred or so applications to the Valuation Office might just make the 'powers that be' sit up and take notice. Lower rateable values means loss of revenue and the probability of refunds. Money talks. Perhaps then they might start to take our claims seriously?
Friday 10 July 2009
Speed camera signs go up
Speed Camera signs have been put up along Leeds/Wakefield Road, at the time of writing they've been in place for about a week. We had sent a couple of emails asking when this latest 'solution' was going to be implemented, and have still to receive a reply, so this activity came as a surprise to all of us.
These are 'mobile speed camera' signs advising motorists that there may be portable speed cameras in operation, usually operating from the back of a van.
It's fair to say that the signs have caused uncertainty, with some drivers sticking within the 40mph limit, whilst other go sailing by at well over 40mph. For those still speeding it can't be down to the lack of a clear warning, there are plenty of signs!
These are 'mobile speed camera' signs advising motorists that there may be portable speed cameras in operation, usually operating from the back of a van.
It's fair to say that the signs have caused uncertainty, with some drivers sticking within the 40mph limit, whilst other go sailing by at well over 40mph. For those still speeding it can't be down to the lack of a clear warning, there are plenty of signs!
Thursday 2 July 2009
Local councillors
The locally elected councillors have a key role to play in campaigns such as ours, the following is an extract from the Leeds City Council web page Councillors' roles and responsibilities -
Why are councillors important?
Leeds councillors provide a voice to the people living in the ward that they represent. They are aware of the needs of their community and are in touch with the issues that local people face.
As well as influencing council decisions on funding and development, they work with other organisations, such as the police, local schools and health services to help bring about improvements to services and the environment for their community.
Worth reading more than once!
The email contact details for our councillors are:
Stewart Golton - stewart.golton@leeds.gov.uk
Steve Smith - steve.cllr.smith@leeds.gov.uk
Don Wilson - donald.wilson@leeds.gov.uk
or they can be contacted on your behalf through Lawrrag.
To find out what's 'hot' and what the councillors are doing for the community check out their web sites - Stewart Golton Steve Smith Don Wilson
Why are councillors important?
Leeds councillors provide a voice to the people living in the ward that they represent. They are aware of the needs of their community and are in touch with the issues that local people face.
As well as influencing council decisions on funding and development, they work with other organisations, such as the police, local schools and health services to help bring about improvements to services and the environment for their community.
Worth reading more than once!
The email contact details for our councillors are:
Stewart Golton - stewart.golton@leeds.gov.uk
Steve Smith - steve.cllr.smith@leeds.gov.uk
Don Wilson - donald.wilson@leeds.gov.uk
or they can be contacted on your behalf through Lawrrag.
To find out what's 'hot' and what the councillors are doing for the community check out their web sites - Stewart Golton Steve Smith Don Wilson
Monday 29 June 2009
HGV Traffic & Planning
Believe it or not there are national Planning guidelines in place to protect the environment, communities, and individuals from the worst impacts of development. The policy that covers the impact of freight transport on local communties is Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport, the full guide can be found here but the section that supports our claims can be found under Freight:
46. Freight movements, particularly those serving developments near to residential areas and in town centres, are often restricted in their hours of operation, through the imposition of conditions, because of concerns over disturbance to residents. However, these restrictions can have the effect of exacerbating congestion during peak times, increasing local pollution, and discouraging further investment in central urban locations. Policies need to strike a balance between the interests of local residents and those of the wider community, including the need to protect the vitality of urban economies, local employment opportunities and the overall quality of life in towns and cities. Local authorities, freight operators, businesses and developers should work together, within the context of freight quality partnerships, to agree on lorry routes and loading and unloading facilities and on reducing vehicle emissions and vehicle and delivery noise levels, to enable a more efficient and sustainable approach to deliveries in such sensitive locations.
Leeds City Council Planning Department has openly stated that they decided that the impact of the ARLA Foods and the Royal Mail distribution depots would be acceptable - the interests of local people were not considered!
46. Freight movements, particularly those serving developments near to residential areas and in town centres, are often restricted in their hours of operation, through the imposition of conditions, because of concerns over disturbance to residents. However, these restrictions can have the effect of exacerbating congestion during peak times, increasing local pollution, and discouraging further investment in central urban locations. Policies need to strike a balance between the interests of local residents and those of the wider community, including the need to protect the vitality of urban economies, local employment opportunities and the overall quality of life in towns and cities. Local authorities, freight operators, businesses and developers should work together, within the context of freight quality partnerships, to agree on lorry routes and loading and unloading facilities and on reducing vehicle emissions and vehicle and delivery noise levels, to enable a more efficient and sustainable approach to deliveries in such sensitive locations.
Leeds City Council Planning Department has openly stated that they decided that the impact of the ARLA Foods and the Royal Mail distribution depots would be acceptable - the interests of local people were not considered!
Saturday 27 June 2009
Support Wanted
Speeds in excess of 70MPH have been recorded by the local authority along Leeds/Wakefield road, 5 years ago the council stated that there was a serious speeding problem along the route - nothing has been done! There is a flow of noisy HGV traffic along the route during night time hours - Government guidance and Planning policies say that this shouldn't happen!
There has already been one major petition supporting calls for action - the authorities simply ignored it!
If there is to be any hope of putting things right there needs to be more people complaining 'officially' -often easier said than done, it's difficult to know what to say, or where to complain to!
We know that traffic issues generally in the area are a source of great concern and complaint so we have launched this site to update the community on what is, or more usually isn't, being done by the authorities, and to give a greater number of individuals the chance to get involved, comment and/or complain - in complete annonimity if preferred.
If you feel strongly that something should be done please send an email to lawrrag@ymail.com
or text 'support' to 07985 991072
There has already been one major petition supporting calls for action - the authorities simply ignored it!
If there is to be any hope of putting things right there needs to be more people complaining 'officially' -often easier said than done, it's difficult to know what to say, or where to complain to!
We know that traffic issues generally in the area are a source of great concern and complaint so we have launched this site to update the community on what is, or more usually isn't, being done by the authorities, and to give a greater number of individuals the chance to get involved, comment and/or complain - in complete annonimity if preferred.
If you feel strongly that something should be done please send an email to lawrrag@ymail.com
or text 'support' to 07985 991072