Tag Archives: Transport

Woodbridge Town Council report Nov 2010

New Strategic Direction: When is a Consultation NOT a Consultation?

SCC has finally embarked on a consultation on the administration’s  New Strategic Direction proposals (proposals that were that were announced seven weeks ago on the 23rd of September) with an online survey for members of the public to respond to, on the Suffolk County Council website. I believe this survey closes on November 18th . Seven weeks to anticipate (and indeed according to the Leader, this was over a YEAR in the planning) and  just three weeks to make a comment. And then only if you are computer literate. This shows the  respect our administration have for the views of the people who elected them.

I am not sure what the administration plans to do to reach the many Suffolk residents who do not easily use or access computers.

We are told the responses from this consultation will be used to provide a report for the Full Council meeting on the 2nd of December.

http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/CouncilAndDemocracy/AboutSCC/NewStrategicDirection.htm

Update: only responses recieved before November 15th will be used in the report to Full Council. So a considerably LESS than three week consultation for those who find the link.

You can’t OBJECT to the NSD on this survey, mind.

Ipswich Road made safer for pedestrians

The refuge island at the top of Ipswich road which I have been pressing for for a couple of years, and which I have funded from QoL  is finally being built.  Sorry for the inconvenience – but it will be worth it! The solar-powered flashing ‘30 ‘sign for halfway down  Ipswich Road (just before the blind bend) which I have also been fighting for has been ordered and should be installed shortly.

When these are in place we might consider looking at what else needs to be done to slow traffic  – and particularly traffic entering Woodbridge from the A12.

Martlesham Creek footpath revamp

I’mvery very pleased to be able to announce the temporary closure of Footpath 6 Woodbridge (Martlesham Creek) from Kyson Point westwards to Footpath 11/12 Martlesham for resurfacing! This stretch of the path is a nighmare in all but the driest weather,  and I have ben pestering the relevant  officer for a while now to see what she could do. Hopefully its closure until Februaryfor proper building up and resurfacing of the quagmire it has become  will result  in many happy years walking for both residents and visitors

SCC Care Homes ‘Consultation’ (as long as you give one of the pre-selected answers, that is!)

At the October Cabinet meeting the Cabinet announced they were looking at the future of SCC Care homes in the county, that is,  looking to divest the services that the Council provides.  They say this is ‘due to the cost of running care homes and ensuring that the care homes are of the highest quality for residents’. They have considered this solely in terms of money rather than the needs of the increasingly ageing population of Suffolk. This is of concern to us because of Lehmann House in Wickham Market, which is one of the homes for which complete closure is postulated

The  options on offer are:

Close the homes and commission alternative services from the independent sector. The council would close all of the homes and sell the sites, and re-commission the required places from the independent sector, as they state that places bought in independent homes are cheaper compared to the cost of providing in house. This relies on there being places  to buy and also brings up issues of who is  ensuring these places are of a suitable standard

Sell all of the homes as going concerns The council would sell the homes as going concerns to one or more new providers who would take over the care of residents, the employment of the staff and the maintenance of the buildings.  Residents could continue to live in the homes and the staff would transfer to the new provider or providers. It was pointed out at Cabinet that many homes could not be sold as going concerns because they were too expensive

Close a number of homes and transfer the remaining homes to the independent sector. This option would involve the closure of a number of homes and transfer of the remaining homes with an agreement to develop new services and facilities to replace the existing homes, which could include new residential homes or very sheltered housing.

Within the papers there is a list of six houses that ‘might be’ (read ‘are being’) considered for early closure

Lehmann House in Wickham Market

Ixworth Court in Ixworth

The Dell in Beccles

Wade House in Stowmarket

Davers Court in Bury St. Edmunds

Paddock House in Eye

An initial  12 week consultation  – that is, 9 weeks longer than the administration has allowed for the NSD – starts 1st November 2010 (consultation ending  24th January 2011) will ‘seek stakeholders’ views’ with a plan for divestment of the homes in March 2011.

You will notice that although there has been no costings attached to this  – beyond the assurance that some council-run Care Homes are ‘too expensive’ (right up there with the ‘feel’ that Bury Road P&R users will just switch to London Road) there is NO OPTION  to maintain the status quo in the  consultation. So much for the democratic process, eh

I am visiting Lehmann House this Friday. You can respond to the consultation, and read the report that went to Cabinet at this address;

http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/CouncilAndDemocracy/Consultations/carehomesconsultation2010.htm

Bury Road Park and Ride to close despite its popularity. Sums don’t count!

Also on Oct 12th the Lib Dems ‘called-in’ Cabinet’s decision to close the close the Bury Road Park and Ride site in January, just after Christmas in the belief  that this would save significant amounts of money. We continue to believe that the three Park and Ride sites are valuable for Suffolk and Suffolk residents alike, and, in addition to contributing to our ‘greenest county’ aspirations could contribute significantly to the Suffolk exchequer is managed sensibly.

The rationale for the closure was based on things like ‘a feel’ for the situation (I kid you not), and without business analysis to explain a sudden drop in profits that coincided with transferring the new contract from  Ipswich Buses to First. Additionally, there was no mention of the cost of changing the contract, and the information they chose to provide  about the level of use was not per site sites. This was particularly interesting because, when we tracked it down, it durned out that the usage at Bury Road is much higher than at Martlesham – nearly double!   We also discovered that the County has just  received £830,000 in European funding to promote sustainable transport around the town of Ipswich, while only recently the Government has committed to spending £25m in Ipswich on sustainable transport including new bus stops and real time information.

None of this was accounted for in the SCC decision, no was there any consideration of introducing a charge for concessionary fares. (This is extraordinary because charging for concessionary fares was due to be introduced in all three Park and Rides three months later and the figures for projected increase in income MUST therefore be available. It is unbelievable that they were not considered as part of this decision-making process – or indeed part of the scrutiny).

We estimate that if each concessionary user paid £1.50 for the service, then the Park and Ride would actually bring around £644,000 worth of income into the County, rather than the current apparent deficit of £800,000.  Our survey of nearly 500 regular users suggests that 10% or less would refuse to pay this modest charge: the decision was based on the administration’s ‘feel’ that 50% would refuse. Again, were there hard facts? No way!!!

Unfortunately the scrutiny committee refused to refer the decision back to Cabinet, with the voting split on political lines rather than those of scientific financial planning. There were 13 out of 14 Conservatives voting for the decision to be upheld, the two Liberal Democrats on the committee voting for the decision to be referred back with support from the one Labour member.

For more information including the original papers, please head to;

http://apps2.suffolk.gov.uk/cgi-bin/committee_xml.cgi?p=detail&id=1_14828

Lose CONNEXIONS – Upcoming Cabinet Items

November’s cabinet meeting has a significantly reduced agenda compared to many meetings in the past. Two issues have specific interest for  people in Woodbridge:

Development of a New Integrated Youth Support Service. Alas, like so very many of the SCC administration’s  ‘positive title’ initiatives this is  misleading. This  is not looking at yer actual ‘development’ at all but  the possible divestment of open access youth clubs (destruction rather than development in other words), and to approve the establishment of a ‘Divestment Fund’ to enable communities to take over the running of existing SCC provision or start up a new type of provision.  The Youth and Connexions service will no longer exist in their current form. Although this is supposed to be up for consultation, we are told in advance that ‘the new service will have fewer features, but have more investment in targeted support for vulnerable people.’

I have already been approached by the heads of two separate youth services worried about the impact of this on their community

http://apps2.suffolk.gov.uk/cgi-bin/committee_xml.cgi?p=doc&id=1_14859&format=doc

The Cabinet is also being asked to agree SCC’s future role in effective management of Suffolk’s natural environment, and to support a bid for the County to be a pioneer authority in delivering the Government’s Total Environment agenda.  The report describes how within the New Strategic Direction it is possible for the County Council to contribute to delivering the Government’s green agenda.

How this links in with the Park and Ride closure , for example, or the fact that the Council’s carbon footprint for private vehicle use went UP this last year while its usage of sustainable transport went DOWN remains to be seen.

http://apps2.suffolk.gov.uk/cgi-bin/committee_xml.cgi?p=doc&id=1_14860&format=doc

Please don’t forget that members of the public are able to ask questions of the administration at each Cabinet meeting.  Please head here to find out more:

http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/CouncilAndDemocracy/CommitteesAgendasReportsandMinutes/PublicQuestionTimeatMeetingsoftheCountyCouncilandCabinet.htm

Woodbridge Town Council report July 2010

I must apologise for my delay in posting this – I got married the following week and clearly forgot to put it up online!

Closure of Embankment footpath

The Environment Agency has closed  the  footpath along the embankment from Woodbridge to Kyson point until October  (– I have asked them to ensure it is reopened briefly for the Regatta weekend) . There will be an alternative footpath route opened for the summer.When I asked the Environment Agency their spokesman explained:

” the Kyson embankment has been suffering from erosion by the tides (as all sea walls do). Recently the original revetment, which consisted of loose concrete and rubble blocks has given way, exposing the clay of the embankment and allowing the erosion process to speed up. To repair the embankment, we will be replacing the clay which has been eroded from the front of the bank and covering this clay with a new revetment, made of open stone asphalt. This material is extremely resilient, reducing our future maintenance costs, and helps to break the wave action, rather than reflect the wave energy, which helps to maintain the level of the salt marshes. The material will soon vegetate and in time become completely hidden from view. We will, in the time available, be addressing the worst areas of erosion this year and will then, subject to funding, return next year to continue the work.”

Locality Budget funding

At the Suffolk Coastal County Councillor Locality meeting county councillors  were given the notion that our budgets might be under threat – perhaps even for the current year. I currently have about five  to six  thousand left  to spend and would like it to go on things that will have some lasting concrete benefit to the town, just in case there is little forthcoming next year. I would also like to allocate this money fairly swiftly to prevent any possible chance of claw-back so welcome all ideas. Recent proposals have included a bench for Kingston Field,  and a litter bin to prevent litter problems at Mill View Close and assistance for the Art Club. Among my thoughts is whether a glassed in notice board advertising the courses and classes available at the Fred Reynolds centre would be useful for the community. I would be grateful for any ideas.

Roads etc

As you see patching work is being undertaken up and down the county at the moment – I was impressed with the speed and efficiency with the road surface was replaced on the Ipswich Road near Notcutts last night. Speaking as a cyclist, it was quite dangerous to go downhill there because the surface was so rough.

As you know there have long been concerns about speeding along Ipswich Road, particularly in relation to those walking and cycling to Kyson and Farlingaye schools. It is particularly crucial at the top of California where many students cross.  I had reserved £12,000 from Quality of Life money to build an island in the road which is being planned at the moment. Now the Highways department at Suffolk County Councilare working with FHS students to design of this island, so as to see the project through! This ought to mean it is designed to be fit for purpose. I enclose a copy of the design that has been agreed on. Proposals to calm Sandy Lane are currently with the director  in overall charge of roads in Suffolk.

After consultation twith the Mayor and the Town Clerk I have also written to her  wondering if she would be prepared to trial the recent proposal by ministers of a 20mph speed limit on urban roads in Woodbridge..

The reduction from 30mph would apply to all town centre and residential. It would be reinforced by signs rather than extra speed cameras and humps.

The new 20mph limit  can be introduced under existing laws and has been tested in Portsmouth, Edinburgh, Newcastle upon Tyne and Hull. York, Norwich and eight London boroughs, including Islington, have announced plans to follow suit.

http://www.roadsafe.com/news/article.aspx?article=1247

I reminded her that  Town and  District Councillors  (and me as County Councillor ) are all concerned about the need for calming on all fronts of the town. Within the last month I have been fielding complaints about the speed of traffic in the 30mph areas of Ipswich Road, Sandy Lane, Hasketon Road, Bredfield/Pyches Road and the Birkitt Road – that is, five of the six roads entering Woodbridge. Although the sixth (Melton Road) is on my colleague Cllr Michael Bond’s territory, I have had complaints about the need for calming recently from Melton residents whose children travel to Farlingaye.   My QoL money this year is destined for project to calm three of these problem places.  I think  it would be appropriate to offer the £7000 set to one side for Sandy Lane and the led sign in Ipswich Road towards 20mph signs  if she were to agree. All views welcome

I will let you know whether this will bear any fruit.

Olympians to train in Suffolk

Lowestoft has been selected by both Great Britain and Canada as the training base for their Gymnastic teams who will  be using  the Waveney Gymnastics Centre.  Suffolk has been actively seeking out teams to use the facilities in the county.  A total of ten sites were selected by the London 2012 committee to hold training facilities for the athletes, the bulk of which are in or near Ipswich    http://www.visit-suffolk.org.uk/suffolktrainingcamps/facilities.cfm . I don’t know if this will result in any improvement in transport provision locally but I hope it might.

Retaining the postie on a bike..

As we all know – most of our post in  Woodbridge is delivered by a dedicated band of bicyclists.  And very nice it is for us, too. I’ve just written to Ms Moya Green – new head of Royal Mail, begging her to  retain these postal deliveries – which had been threatened under her predecessor (need I  say that the dread excuse words ‘health and safety’ were mentioned..)

(You could do so too if you wanted by following this link)

Dear Ms Greene

Please preserve the postie on a bicycle!

Welcome to Royal Mail. I wish you the best of luck in your new role, and I urge you to begin your tenure at the head of Royal Mail by reversing your predecessor’s disastrous policies regarding bicycles.

I am the County Councillor for Woodbridge, in Suffolk and have made it my personal mission to cycle everywhere on council business, come rain, come shine, and come whatever I need to carry. (Much like a postie in fact.) This is no hardship for either of us. Cycling is a wonderfully cost-effective, healthy, fast and carbon-neutral way for post to be delivered and my district the bulk of our post is delivered this way. Taliking to my local postman the other day, he told me that the cycling had actually drawn him to the job.

Indeed, cycles have been used to deliver post in the UK for over a century. During this time, the postie on a bicycle has become a much treasured national institution, particularly as our compact, congested towns and cities do not always lend themselves readily to motor vehicle access.

Therefore, it is with great shock and sadness that I have read recent reports suggesting that under your predecessor, Royal Mail planned to phase out the vast majority of their delivery bikes within the next few years, replacing them with electric trolleys despatched from vans. This plan goes against government policies about the environment, transport and road safety. It also goes against Royal Mail’s own corporate social responsibility policies that call for increasing the health of the workforce and reducing transport-related carbon emissions. It does not reflect the wishes of the public or show respect for a national institution.

I am joining CTC – as the UK’s national cyclists’ organisation – in calling on you to reverse this ban. In the future, the positive effects of this form of post delivery will contribute to reducing congestion, air pollution, carbon emissions and inactivity related illness, while promoting safer roads through the Safety in Number effect, which has found that the more cyclists there are on the roads the safer it is for everyone.

I urge you to reverse your predecessor’s decision to scrap most post delivery by bicycle. Instead, please explore the options for using cargo bicycles and tricycles to carry more post in a more effective and more environmentally friendly way.

Yours sincerely

Cllr Caroline Page

County Councillor for Woodbridge