Workplace parking charges -will EDDC officers and councillors finally have to cave in

Just about every year, Ottery independent councillor Roger Giles – whose environmental credentials are strong – has petitioned for EDDC councillors and officers to introduce parking charges to encourage them to think more about the need to use their cars. Every year, the Conservative majority has voted him down.

Maybe this will change – though with rural public transport so poor, it seems likely that they may have to stump up the cost! Particularly when what is left of it often stops so early!

Buses from the new Honiton HQ to Sidmouth will end at 8 pm, to Axminster they will end at 6.10 pm and to Seaton at 3.40 pm (yes, that’s right 15.40!).

Owl’s guess – allowances and salaries will be raised to cover the extra cost.

“The AA says plans to charge drivers up to £1,000 a year to park at work could become a “poll tax on wheels”.

Under plans to cut congestion, reduce pollution and raise money for public transport, a workplace parking levy is being considered by at least 10 councils.

The charges would affect businesses with more than 10 parking spaces and the AA said the costs would be passed on to workers.

The levy has already been rolled out in Nottingham where four in 10 companies pass on the costs to staff.

Since it was introduced in 2012, the charge has raised £53.7m which has been used to improve Nottingham’s tram network.

Hounslow Council in west London is proposing to charge between £500 and £1,000 a year for every parking space and at least nine other councils are considering imposing the levy.

Other cash-strapped authorities are likely to consider the measure because of a shortage of funding for road improvements and public transport.”

https://news.sky.com/story/drivers-could-be-charged-up-to-1000-a-year-to-park-at-work-11611486

“Local councils blame austerity for lack of investment in road improvements”

“Council leaders have hit back at suggestions rising revenues from car parking charges are not re-invested in roads in Great Britain.

All surplus income generated from parking charges was funnelled back into “essential transport projects”, the Local Government Association said, responding to a report from price comparison website confused.com.

Councils in Great Britain made £847m from parking activities in the 2017-18 financial year, according to confused.com’s analysis of government data.

This was a 24% increase (£165m) on the £682m they earned in 2013-14, the report calculated from local authorities’ published accounts. Over the same period, however, their spending on road improvements fell from £2.8bn to £2.4bn, confused.com said.

Amanda Stretton, confused.com motoring editor, said: “While councils are often justified in charging for parking and issuing fines for illegal parking, many motorists are confused about why this money isn’t being re-invested into our roads.

“Poor road conditions is a major concern for drivers, with roads riddled with potholes and unclear markings, it’s no wonder drivers want councils to be putting more into making these better.”

The LGA said the report ignored the effects of austerity on councils.

Martin Tett, Transport, spokesman for the Local Government Association, which represents 370 councils in England and Wales, said: “Any income raised through on-street parking charges and parking fines is spent on running parking services and any surplus is only spent on essential transport projects, such as tackling our national £9 billion roads repair backlog and other local transport projects that benefit high streets and local economies.

“This report completely ignores central government funding reductions. Between 2010 and 2020, councils will have lost 57p out of every £1 the government had provided for services, which is a much more significant source of funding for roads than surplus parking income.”

He added: “Surplus parking income is not the only source of money for roads and not all transport spend is spent on roads but can still be helpful to motorists, such as supporting concessionary bus fares to help reduce congestion.”

A government-commissioned report recently advised councils to slash parking charges to bring shoppers back to the high street. The High Street Report was carried out by a panel led by retail expert John Timpson.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/01/local-councils-blame-austerity-lack-investment-road-improvements

EDA Councillor calls out Highways Department for inconsistency in Sidford

“‘Inconsistent’ highways bosses have been slammed for supporting a plan to build 40 homes when they refused to support one house being built just down the road.

District Councillor Marianne Rixson raised concerns about two cases where she claims the county council’s highways department’s decision making had been ‘inconsistent’.

Highways objected to an application to build one home in Sidford Road because the proposed development was next to the A375 Sidford Road, which connects to Sidmouth and Honiton, as well as to the A3052 Exeter to Lyme Regis at Sidford Cross at a staggered traffic light junction. At peak times, the signalled junction can cause long tailbacks past the new home.

However, Highways supported an application to build 40 retirement flats at Green Close in Sidford, just 0.2 miles away..

In its report Highways said the development at Green Close would ‘potentially’ generate a slight increase in traffic compared to the site’s former use as a care home.

Cllr Rixson said the South Lawn access to the development ‘in effect is single track because of parked cars’.

“There will be 40 apartments with 24 car parking spaces. These additional vehicles will be entering and exiting via South Lawn and this could cause tailbacks at the junction of South Lawn with the A375, yet Highways raised no objections,” she said.

“I really cannot understand why Highways raise no objections to major developments yet for a single dwelling produce arguments which would be applicable to all three of the applications listed below.

“The Herald attended the meeting on December 4 and heard East Devon District Council members being sympathetic toward my objections to the change of access but stated that, as highways had not objected, it would not succeed at appeal.”

A Devon County Council spokesman said: “Despite the close proximity of the two developments the implications of the two schemes on the highways network were very different, site specific and not comparable. When as the highways authority we give our observations regarding developments we follow the National Planning Policy Framework, the National Planning Policy Guidance and the Manual for Streets to ensure that our recommendations are consistent as possible.”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/highway-bosses-slammed-for-decisions-at-sidmouth-1-5839296

More rural bad news: “Bus travel: Fewer passengers as funding falls”

Buses are the most common mode of public transport, accounting for 60% of all trips.

But on the buses, passenger numbers are falling.

There were 9% fewer journeys on local bus services in Britain in the first three months of this financial year than in the same period a decade ago.

The Campaign for Better Transport says this is partly down to cuts to the amount local authorities England and Wales are spending on buses.

In the past seven years, council spending on buses has fallen by 45%, according to figures released to the campaign group under the Freedom of Information law.

Outside London, buses are largely run by private companies, which make their money from passenger fares. Then, local councils pay subsidies to plug the gaps, often in rural areas where running a route is more expensive or less lucrative for companies.

Areas where running a bus service is the least lucrative for private operators will rely most on council subsidy – and so be most effected by the cuts.

In 2017-18, there were 11 councils in England that spent nothing at all on running bus services.

This has meant 3,000 routes being reduced or scrapped since 2010-11.

There are significant differences in fares, too.

Between September 2017 and September 2018 in London, fares rose by 0.4% – in the capital, buses are still public and regulated.

In other metropolitan areas in England where fares are left to the free market, there was an average 2.4% increase, while in non-metropolitan areas fares rose by 7.9%.

But if bus cuts and fare rises leave some people unable to get around, don’t councils have a duty to do something about it?

In fact, councils have very few specific obligations around buses, making them an easy target for councils as the cuts bite.

There are specific things they legally have to do, for example provide transport for children otherwise unable to get to school.

They also have to make sure there are concessionary fares for older and disabled people. Although this is partly funded by central government, the grant has been falling, leaving councils to make up the difference.

But other than that, they are not obliged to fund buses and ensure everyone has access to them.

What do councils have to do?

It’s possible a council could be challenged in the courts under equality legislation if it could be shown to be disproportionately restricting certain groups of people.

But legal guidance suggests it would be difficult to challenge a council if it could show it had assessed the needs of a local area and the impact of removing a bus service, particularly on elderly and disabled people.

If after this assessment, councils decide they need to make cuts because of a lack of funds, this would be likely to be legal.

But councils can’t let bus cuts leave a community that needs transport with no transport service at all.

And in some areas, councils have used community transport services – often minibuses driven by volunteers – to fill the gaps.

There could be other reasons for the fall in passenger numbers, though.

For the past couple of years, passenger numbers have also been falling in London, despite its relative protection from cuts.

Mayor Sadiq Khan has suggested this could be driven by fewer people going out, as Netflix and Deliveroo make staying at home easier and more tempting.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46524510

Could this happen in Sidbury?

Crashed lorry ‘holding up’ Breamore cottage:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-46499246

“Laybys in Cranbrook are being used by lorry drivers to ‘entertain’ women”

Owl LOVES the comment from the DCC officer: ““I know this is not a popular thing to suggest, but the people who bought the houses bought them in full knowledge of the layby” but Owl thinks they expected the LORRIES to be laid by, not ladies being laid by lorry drivers!

“Two laybys that lorry drivers are using to ‘entertain’ female companions will be closed.

The laybys, right in the middle of Cranbrook, are also being used a public toilet, for boy racers to congregate and play loud music and swear, and the proximity to houses mean that lorry drivers can see into homes from their cabs.

Unanimous agreement was given by councillors to close the laybys and for Devon County Council’s Highways officers to come up with a solution.

Cllr Ray Bloxham, who brought the proposal to Friday’s East Devon Highways and Traffic Orders Committee, said that the laybys used to be in a rural location but now are right in the middle of Cranbrook, and homes are now located immediately adjacent to the laybys.

He said: “The two laybys in question are now principally used by HGVs for overnight parking as a free car park. This results in considerable disturbance to adjacent households and there have been a series of complaints about noise disturbance especially overnight from refrigerated units and from engines being started and left running during the early hours. There have been ancillary complaints about anti-social behaviour by drivers using the hedgerow as a toilet and other unpleasant behaviours.

“The complaints by local residents have been referred to both Environmental Health at East Devon District Council and to Highways, and the only solution that was put forward and supported by highways department was to close the laybys.”

He added that there was organised lorry parking less than a mile away in Clyst Honiton, but there is a fee for it, so they prefer to park for free.

A resident of Roman Way, which is just 15m away over a hedge from the layby, said that they are facing anti-social behaviour ‘night and day’.

She said: “There are privacy issues as from their cabs, they can see into our residences, while the anti-social behaviour is disturbing out sleep. One lorry driver ‘entertained’ a female companion in his cab overnight and she left at 5.30am in the morning – this is the kind of behaviour we want to end.

“Some of the drivers urinate and use the hedge as a toilet, and they leave litter there which attracts vermin, and at night you get boy racers there and they play music and swear loudly.

“It is a real nuisance and causes health risks to us and our children. It doesn’t support the healthy town concept and for us as residents, the issues are very real. If you lived in our home and had this every day and night, you would realise the issues that we are facing at the moment.”

Mike Jones, Senior Devon County Council Traffic Officer, said that the laybys were on the road so lorry drivers do have a place to stop. He added that the road is a diversion route for the A30 and the road does need marshalling facilities and laybys are a useful thing to have, before saying: “I know this is not a popular thing to suggest, but the people who bought the houses bought them in full knowledge of the layby.”

But Cllr Richard Scott said that was an inappropriate argument to make, as it would be the same as saying if you bought a house next to a field, then it could never be built on. He said that if that argument was used, then Cranbrook itself would never have been built.

Cllr Phil Twiss said that he fully supported the laybys being closed to vehicles, but said that as a cyclist who used the road, those laybys are a handy little refuge to stop and have a drink or check tyres. He said: “I agree that we should close them, but officers need to go away and come up with a practical solution.”

The East Devon HATOC unanimously agreed that the two laybys, located on opposite sides of the highway alongside the B3174 at Cranbrook, approximately 100m west of Parsons Lane, be closed to vehicular use, either by the introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order, or a different solution that the highways department could identify which meant moving the kerb line.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/laybys-cranbrook-being-used-lorry-2303961

“Luxembourg to become first country to make all public transport free”

“Luxembourg is set to become the first country in the world to make all its public transport free.

Fares on trains, trams and buses will be lifted next summer under the plans of the re-elected coalition government led by Xavier Bettel, who was sworn in for a second term as prime minister on Wednesday.

Bettel, whose Democratic party will form a government with the leftwing Socialist Workers’ party and the Greens, had vowed to prioritise the environment during the recent election campaign.

On top of the transport pledge, the new government is also considering legalising cannabis, and introducing two new public holidays.

Luxembourg City, the capital of the small Grand Duchy, suffers from some of the worst traffic congestion in the world.

It is home to about 110,000 people, but a further 400,000 commute into the city to work. A study suggested that drivers in the capital spent an average of 33 hours in traffic jams in 2016.

While the country as a whole has 600,000 inhabitants, nearly 200,000 people living in France, Belgium and Germany cross the border every day to work in Luxembourg.

Luxembourg has increasingly shown a progressive attitude to transport. This summer, the government brought in free transport for every child and young person under the age of 20. Secondary school students can use free shuttles between their institution and their home. Commuters need only pay €2 (£1.78) for up to two hours of travel, which in a country of just 999 sq miles (2,590 sq km) covers almost all journeys.

Now, from the start of 2020 all tickets will be abolished, saving on the collection of fares and the policing of ticket purchases. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/05/luxembourg-to-become-first-country-to-make-all-public-transport-free

“HS2 rail chief Terry Morgan faces sack over spiralling costs”

The chairman of HS2 is facing the sack less than five months after his appointment because of fears that costs are spiralling out of control.

Sir Terry Morgan is also set to be removed as the chairman of Crossrail, the ambitious line linking east and west London, relieving him of leadership of two of the UK’s highest-profile infrastructure projects, according to a report.

Theresa May was expected to move against Morgan, who was described as “world-class” by Grayling when he appointed him in July to HS2, the planned high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham. A source said that Morgan was expected to leave both posts within weeks.

The news was first reported by the Financial Times on Friday. It is thought that both Grayling and the chancellor, Philip Hammond, had declared they had no confidence in Morgan’s leadership and urged May to remove him.

The FT quoted a government official close to HS2 as saying: “They told the prime minister they have no confidence in him and she agrees. It is only a question of finding the right moment to announce it.”

Downing Street, the Department for Transport and HS2 declined to comment. The DfT said: “We would not comment on personnel matters.” …

Grayling had allied himself closely to Morgan in the summer. “Sir Terry’s appointment as chair of HS2 ensures that we will continue to see world-class leadership in an exciting period for one of Europe’s most significant infrastructure projects, helping deliver huge economic growth and improvements for passengers across the country,” he said when he announced the decision.

Morgan, the transport secretary added, had a “wealth of experience and expertise”, as well as a “respected reputation and enthusiasm”. He cited Morgan’s work on previous infrastructure projects, including upgrading several London Underground lines and working at BAE Systems. Morgan said the appointment was a “privilege” and promised HS2 would “help transform this country”.

But concerns were raised about its direction after it emerged days after Morgan’s appointment at HS2 that Crossrail was running about £600m over budget. And, in August, the government’s infrastructure adviser said ministers should spend an extra £43bn on projects linked to HS2 in order to make it worthwhile.

In an article for the Sunday Telegraph, the chairman of the National Infrastructure Commission, Sir John Armitt, said the government “cannot simply construct a new high-speed rail line and leave it at that; to get the biggest bang for our buck, we need to think about the whole journey that passengers will take”.

He went on: “Once people reach the end of their HS2 journey and travel into the city they are visiting, on current form, they would in many cases face inadequate public transport links and congestion on the roads.” To deal with that, he suggested handing the cash to local areas to improve their infrastructure.

There were further reports that HS2’s budget could eventually spiral to £80bn. The Sunday Times said a leaked report had warned that the official budget of £56bn for the project may have to be significantly increased.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/30/hs2-rail-chief-terry-morgan-faces-sack-over-spiralling-costs

Sidford Business Park: Traffic action group to reveal survey results at public meetings on 21 November 2018

Sidbury Traffic Action Group (STAG) is hosting a meeting in which the results of a traffic survey will be announced.

The survey focused on electronic speed and traffic movement and was part of ongoing concerns over drivers not sticking to the enforced speed limits.

Also at the meeting, the group will discuss the establishment of a speed watch group that will work in conjunction with the police.

There will be information about the group’s recent discussions with Devon County Council.

Finally, the group will reveal where it will go next in their pursuit for 20mph flashing signs.

The group launched a campaign in April urging people to ‘kill their speed and not villagers’.

Members of the group have concerns with cars breaking the speed limits in the town.

The meeting will take place in Sidbury Village Hall on November 21 at 2 and 7pm.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/sidbury-traffic-action-group-to-reveal-survey-results-at-public-meeting-1-5781477

“Calls for removal of Sidford business park site in Local Plan are ‘unrealistic’, says Highways boss [Stuart Hughes]”

Owl says: Interestingly Hughes does not explain why the site was added at the very last minute and why officers and Tory councillors did not attempt to remove it BEFORE it went to the inspector when its inclusion had been highlighted by local people in time for remedial action ….. especially as Hughes is the area’s DCC councillor with responsibility for highways.

“Cllr Hughes said: “If the decision is appealed by the applicant then it will be considered by a planning inspector.

“It would however also allow representations to be made to the inspector on other elements such as flooding, AONB etc.”

Calls to change the Local Plan:

“Suggesting the land at Sidford should be taken out of the Local Plan is unrealistic, given the plan is already in place.

“A Local Plan inspector is not going to review a decision for an already ‘made plan’ that has been in effect for some time.

“By the time any refresh of the East Devon Local Plan is completed this matter will have most likely been decided and there should not be any false hope or expectation put forward that this will be any different.

“The simple truth is that the land allocation at Sidford should never have been included in the Local Plan.

“It came in as a late addition without full consideration of its suitability, particularly as other far more appropriate sites which were ‘brownfield’ should have been considered and were put forward at the early stages of the process of making the Local Plan.

“My personal suggested site would have been adjacent to the Garden Centre on the A3052. …”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/calls-for-removal-of-sidford-business-park-site-in-local-plan-are-unrealistic-says-highways-boss-1-5781382

“Funding [loan] agreed for Axminster relief road that will end gridlock in the town centre

This loan of £7 million is being taken out based on an expectation that developers will pay it back … good luck there councillors, especially as developers are Crown Estates and … drum roll or scary music … PERSIMMON!

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/funding-agreed-axminster-relief-road-2211212

Exmouth infrastructure will not support 120 new homes says town council

“Exmouth’s infrastructure cannot support new 120 home development, town council claims.

The town council’s planning committee has refused to support a full application made by Taylor Wimpey for land at Pankhurst Close, Littleham.

At the meeting, councillors raised concerns about the impact the development could have on ‘already busy’ roads surrounding the site.

Councillors voted to object to the proposal which includes the associated demolition of a disused industrial building.

They argued there was inadequate infrastructure to support it and that it would represent a loss of employment land.

Councillor Fred Caygill, who is the deputy chairman of the committee, said the developer would be ‘better served’ combining this project with its nearby Plumb Park site where more than 260 homes are currently being built.

He added: “If this development was to go ahead, I feel it would be better served if it joined up with Plumb Park so you had a continuous through-route so at least you’ve got access for emergency vehicles .

“You’ve got a traffic flow system rather than bottle necks.

“A lot of people who buy houses these days are both working with two cars and as we know a lot of employment is into Exeter and surrounding industrial estates.

“We’ve got lots of industry in terms of estates so there is a considerable amount of people moving into the area.

“The traffic system is going to get worse and also the parking within that estate.

“I feel a through-road will be better.”

Cllr Brian Toye said this development would only put more ‘stress’ on the area’s existing infrastructure.

“This does nothing to address the problem with traffic we have in Littleham Road,” he said.

“The problem is people are going to find rat-runs through the estates to get up to the new Dinan Way extension.”

Cllr Maddie Chapman also raised concerns about the impact of removing asbestos from the site.

She said it should be moved especially during the day.

“It should be at a quiet time, late evening, and take it off site,” she said.

A final decision on the application will be made at a later date, yet to be confirmed by the planning authority, East Devon District Council.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/council-opposes-plan-for-120-homes-in-pankhurst-close-1-5766553

“Bus firms pay fat cats £1.5 BILLION – while prices go up 55% and routes are axed”

“Bus firms have paid shareholders £1.5billion in dividends in the past 10 years, while fares have soared and services have been axed.

Fares have gone up 55% on average since 2008, far outstripping pay growth. Some passengers have even been hit by increases of 100% and bus use is at a 12-year low.

Arriva, FirstGroup, Go-Ahead, National Express and Stagecoach carry 70% of all bus passengers and have paid an average £149million a year in dividends in the past 10 years.

The most recent company records show they paid out dividends amounting to £48,077,200 from profits in the South East, £23,521,200 in the North East, £18,460,700 in the North West, £13,767,700 in the Midlands and £27,309,700 in London.

Shadow Transport Secretary Andy McDonald said: “Our bus networks are being bled dry by greedy private operators. Labour will bring buses under public control and ownership in order to reverse bus cuts rather than fill the pockets of shareholders.

“It is an outrage that bus companies enjoy colossal profits as thousands of routes are cut or withdrawn. The bus network has shrunk to its smallest size in decades and passenger numbers are plummeting.

“A combination of privatisation and Tory cuts is killing local bus services.

“Labour would enhance and expand bus services, including providing free travel to under-25s.”

The research by campaign group Better Buses for Greater Manchester also found bus journeys had fallen by 40% in urban areas since the deregulation of services by the Tories 32 years ago.

In London, where deregulation did not apply, passenger journeys on the franchised network have doubled and bus companies’ profits are around 4%, compared to 8% in cities where services are deregulated.

The Better Buses for Greater Manchester findings are revealed as a campaign is launched today urging Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham to re-regulate services, bringing buses under public control.

Pascale Robinson, of Better Buses for Greater Manchester, said: “The deregulation we have now means bus companies just run the routes they want to at a whim. They can charge what they like.

“This means the big five bus companies are cherry-picking the profitable routes, making a killing, and it is us in Greater Manchester who suffer infrequent, unreliable and expensive buses.”

Greater Manchester is one of the first cities to consider re-regulating its bus network, which would give the mayor the choice to put the public in control instead of the big firms.

Ms Robinson said: “By this method bus firms are given controlled contracts to run the services we need, services which are reliable and affordable.

“We call on Mr Burnham to be bold and give us the bus network we deserve. We can’t keep letting these companies run a Wild West, charging through the roof for a patchy service.

“For every pound of dividend given to shareholders in London, 82 journeys were taken. Elsewhere across the country, where buses are mostly deregulated except for a few small pockets, it was just under 20.”

In Greater Manchester, passengers have complained that changes to the 372 Hazel Grove-Stockport service means taking two different buses to do the same journey, which used to pass by the hospital.

They now need a £4.50 “day rider” ticket, adding £1 to each journey.

This summer the Mirror revealed how mum-of-nine Gemma Headley, 36, of Driffield, East Yorks, had to walk seven miles to get her daughters to infant school because of bus cuts. Department for Transport figures show the number of bus routes at a 28-year low.

The bus network has shrunk by 8% in the last decade. Since 2010, the Tories have almost halved funding for bus services in England and 3,347 routes have been axed or reduced.

Experts say investing in bus travel would bring benefits as people return to towns and cities to spend their money.

An analysis for Greener Journeys by auditors KPMG LLP shows that targeted investment to improve bus services would typically generate £3.32 of net economic benefit for each £1 spent.

Steve Chambers, of the Campaign for Better Transport, said: ”Across the country we are seeing the alarming impact this is having on communities, especially in rural areas, as people are being left isolated and unable to get to work, get to the shops, visit friends or access vital public services.

“The loss of bus services also has an adverse effect on congestion and air pollution as more people turn to cars, jamming up already congested roads.”

Mirror reader and retired lorry driver Michael Palmer, 74, tells how a half-hourly service from his home in the North Fitzwarren, Somerset, to Taunton, is now every two hours, finishing too early for workers returning home.

He said: “We are living in the 21st century, this is England, we should have the best public transport service in the world. Where did it all go wrong?”

A Department for Transport spokesman said: “We provide around £250million every year to support bus services and a further £1billion to support older and disabled people using the free bus pass scheme.”

The Confederation of Passenger Transport UK, which represents bus and coach operators, said the dividends paid were outweighed by investment, with Stagecoach investing £1billion on around 7, 000 new buses in 10 years.

How bus prices have risen over a decade…

All prices are for day tickets except London.

Birmingham
2008 – £3.30
2018 – £6.70
A 103% increase

Newcastle
2008 – £3.50
2018 – £5.20
A 49% increase

Manchester
2008 – £3.30
2018 – £5.60
A 70% increase

Leicester
2008 – £2.60
2018 – £5.20
A 100% increase

Derby
2008 – £3.20
2018 – £4.20
A 31% increase

Cornwall
(All day)
2008 – £8.20
2018 – £12
A 46% increase

Bath
2008 – £2.20
2018 – £4.50
A 105% increase

Liverpool
2008 – £3
2018 – £4.80
A 60% increase

Nottingham
2008 – £3.00
2018 – £4
A 33% increase

London
(No day tripper anymore)
Single journey 2008 – 90p
Single journey 2018 – £1.50
A 66% increase

Why ‘On the Buses’ loses comedic fun to big fares
By Paul Routledge

Maggie Thatcher may not, as legend says, have sneered that “any man over 26 who finds himself on a bus can count himself a failure”. As an inveterate user of public transport, I’m happy to be seen as a failure.

The bus is a traditional part of the British way of life. It’s a place for gossip, getting to the shops, the hospital and to see friends, a moving theatre of society.

No wonder On The Buses was so popular. The soap played to our affection for the bus. “Sit at the back for a longer ride!”

But it’s getting harder and harder. Thatcher’s deregulation and privatisation of the industry was a failure for would-be travellers of any age.

It brought fewer routes and higher fares – with profits and subsidies creamed off for investors, many of them foreign.

I hear grumbles galore from fellow passengers about late and cancelled services. But it’s not the crews’ fault that the system isn’t working.

The sell-off brought redundancies. The clippie went out with cost-saving one-man operation. Drivers face exhausting schedules.

The Tories cut local government funding, so councils slashed subsidies to the companies, who take it out on the passenger.

We’ve waited too long at the bus stop for an end to this rip-off.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/bus-firms-pay-fat-cats-13540251

Some better news – reduced winter car parking charges start on 1 November

Winter parking tariff starts this week:

£2 all day in all East Devon car parks compared to £1 per hour summer parking charges. BUT this applies to CASH paying parking only – parking permits and Parkmobile tariffs are NOT included.

No excuses not to do your Christmas shopping in your local East Devon towns.

“Budget 2018: Anger as Hammond’s £60m pledge to plant trees is dwarfed by £30bn road spending plan”

“Environmental campaigners have condemned the chancellor’s budget plan to spend £60m on tree planting while £30bn is being pledged for roads.

They highlighted the contrast between the money the government is vowing to spend on improving green spaces and how much it is putting towards infrastructure that they fear will encourage driving and damage the environment.

Philip Hammond will announce in the budget that £60m will be spent on planting millions more trees across England, including a project to plant new street and urban trees set to receive £10m.

Environmental groups attack government’s £30bn roads spending plan
The remaining £50m will be used to buy carbon credits from landowners who plant woodland, the Treasury said.

But hours earlier, the government revealed it would be putting £30bn – 500 times as much – towards roads.

That money – ringfenced vehicle excise duty – will be used to upgrade and repair major routes including motorways, as well as fixing potholes.

But it may also go towards building new roads. …”

EDDC hopes Persimmon and Crown Estates will pay them back for Axminster Relief Road!

Owl says: good luck with that!

“Councillors are being asked to borrow nearly £7m to ensure the long-awaiting Axminster relief road can be delivered.

The £16.7m road, which hopes to finally end the bottleneck of traffic travelling through the town centre, would be built to the east of the town near land allocated in the Local Plan for 650 homes, eight hectares of employment land, and a primary school.

£10m from the government’s Housing Infrastructure Fund will help deliver the road, with the remainder of the cost covered by developers.

But East Devon District Council’s Cabinet is being recommended to borrow and forward fund the remaining £6.7m, and claw the funds back from developers at a later date, to ensure the road can be built in one swoop and not in stages, as Persimmon Homes control the northern and southern parts of the site and would provide the two ends of the relief road, while the Crown Estate control land in the middle.

A draft masterplan which will provide a template for the development of the site is expected to come before the Strategic Planning Committee by the end of 2018.

The report of Ed Freeman, Service Lead for Planning Strategy and Development Management, to next Wednesday’s cabinet meeting says: “The relief road is vital to the future growth of the town given the impact that HGV’s and other traffic passing through the town has on congestion, air quality, the attractiveness of the town centre and the damage that has been caused to historic buildings as large vehicles try and navigate its narrow streets. The relief road has the potential to divert 30 per cent of all traffic which travels east after passing through the town centre.”

Mr Freeman is recommending that the Council deliver the road in its entirety from the start of this project using the £10m HIF funding they have successfully bid for and borrowing the shortfall.

He added: “It is considered that the only realistic and viable means of delivering the relief road and doing it in good time to deliver the benefits for the community of Axminster is to procure and deliver the entire relief road borrowing the additional funds from the public loans and works board with repayment secured from the developers.

…. Questions though have been raised about whether the proposed north/south bypass that runs to the east of the town is the best option for Axminster.

At a recent town forum event concerning the relief road, residents said that a western route would be preferable as it would eliminate the bottleneck at the Weycroft Bridge, which the current proposed eastern route did not.

However, reporting back at a town council meeting, Cllr Ian Hall, East Devon District Council’s ward member for Axminster Rural and County Councillor for Axminster, said that the £10 million Housing Infrastructure Funding was not transferable to another route in Axminster.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/7m-borrowed-council-ensure-axminster-2147861

“New houses must be more than Noddy dwellings in the middle of nowhere”

“….. A report by the campaign group Transport for New Homes reveals a landscape pockmarked with new developments cut off from public transport, forcing people on low and middle incomes into car ownership – often two per household – for the sake of a cheaper house. Researchers visited 20 new housing developments around the country, many of which, in the report’s words, didn’t “connect to anything other than the road network”.

Central government assigns housebuilding targets to councils, which they must deliver purely on the basis of numbers. Local planners ask meekly for funding to integrate new developments into public transport networks and are told to get lost, because properly planned and integrated transport takes time, money and, above all, political will.

Planning incentives ‘lead to housing estates centred on car use’

The net result is that “we are building car parks as much as new homes”, according to the report. Compare this with the Netherlands, where any new development has to have integration into walking, cycling and public transport as a primary priority, and where a nationwide smartcard can be used anywhere in the country on any mode of public transport. (This fact alone makes me want to move there.)

Britain right after the war was better served by public transport than it is now. Until the late 1950s most towns and cities had extensive and cheap tram and trolleybus networks to complement buses. Rural and semi-rural areas were served by an extensive branch railway network until the 1963 Beeching report cut thousands of miles from the national network and closed more than 2,000 stations.

Only in the late 1970s did some councils, facing increasing congestion and pollution, try to redress the imbalance by offering super-cheap bus fares on their municipal services.

While car ownership appears to have peaked, the number of car journeys has risen since the 2008 crash, suggesting more pressured lives, longer and more frequent commutes, and the legacy of public transport cuts. Younger people are increasingly drawn to cities, where public transport tends to be better, and are less likely than ever to own cars. Yet those who live outside cities are increasingly forced towards car use, purely because planners can’t force developers to do anything other than build houses. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/25/new-houses-housing-targets-residents-car

Cranbrook: no road markings causing serious problems with anti-social parking

Cranbrook Town Council Facebook page draws attention to a serious traffic problem:

“APPEAL FOR CONSIDERATE PARKING ON CRANBROOK’S ROADS:

There was another near miss earlier today when a resident pulling carefully out of their road was unable, due to cars parked at the junction, to see a group of approaching cyclists. Although nobody was hurt on this occasion, the cyclists had to swerve and could have been forced into the path of oncoming traffic. Although Cranbrook has no road lining may we remind residents that the principles of the Highway Code still apply.”

6 mins ·
MESSAGE & APOLOGY FROM E.ON FOR PHASE 4 RESIDENTS – OVERRUN
E.on is sorry that the works to the temporary energy centre on Phase 4 have overrun but assures residents they should be completed by 5pm.

A frazzled mother starts huge bus service protest in Bristol

“I gave birth to my daughter in March, and I’ve begrudgingly had to place her in a nursery already because I have to work. The nursery is on the other side of Bristol to where I live. For more than a month now I’ve failed to drop her off on time because I’ve had to wait so long for a bus to turn up. The journey normally takes 45 minutes in the rush hour, but the waiting adds an extra 45 minutes (even though buses are supposed to run every 12 minutes).

Getting her home in the evening has been even more of an ordeal. Night after night we couldn’t get back before her bedtime. At the end of the week, my baby had bags under her eyes and red pupils – the sign of a true commuter, but she’s only seven-months-old. The waits were so long I had to breastfeed her on the side of the road. I don’t mind breastfeeding in public, but I’d rather not be outside in the middle of October balancing my baby on my knee.

I finally broke a week ago when the bus I was on – operated like most in the city by First Bus – was so full it passed two stops, leaving 60 passengers stranded. By the time I reached the city centre I’d used my phone to call for a demonstration on Facebook.

Over the next 24 hours 800 people signed up. Stories of missed hospital appointments, children being late for school and people being late for work flooded in. It quickly became clear I hadn’t just organised a demonstration; the outpouring of stories and anger was now online for all to see, share and sympathise.

First Bus contacted me after the demonstration was advertised to take place on 24 November in the centre of Bristol. They blamed students returning to Bristol’s two universities, schools restarting in September, road works and closures of the popular Bristol Parkway train station. But it has admitted that it is 150 drivers short in the west of England. To try to cope, staff have been brought in from as far away as Cornwall. Any company that runs an important service in a major city needs to have planning skills and the ability to recruit and retain staff.

Ironically, while this took place, the mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees, announced he wanted to double the number of passengers using Bristol buses. The idea that the current system could support twice the number of passengers is laughable and shows how far removed elected officials have become from the reality of privately run services. This is because they have had too little say in how transport services are run since they were rapidly privatised in the 1980s.

This is not just a problem for Bristol. The national campaign group We Own It says prices have risen by 35% above inflation as result of bus privatisation, and in the past 10 years £1.8bn of revenue generated by the big five bus companies – Arriva, Stagecoach, First, Go-Ahead and National Express – has gone straight to shareholders. This is money that could be reinvested into bus services if they were nationalised. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/bus-revolt-bristol-privatised-services

Sidford Business Park: a begged question

If the Sidford Business Park was turned down because of

“the potentially lethal combination of narrow roads and increased heavy goods vehicle usage” …

why was it hurriedly and grubbily added to the Local Plan at the last minute?

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/06/18/sidford-business-park-a-grubby-history/

“Planners have said NO to Sidford Business Park and turned down the controversial plans over a potentially lethal combination of narrow roads and increased heavy goods vehicle usage.

East Devon District Council planners rejected plans to build industrial, storage and non-residential institutions on agricultural land to the east of Two Bridges Road in Sidford.

They were refused on the grounds of harm to highway safety, relating to increased heavy goods vehicle usage of the area’s narrow roads and the decision was made by officers with the Chairman of Development Management Committee, Cllr Mike Howe, in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/planners-refuse-controversial-sidford-business-2120014