EDlifechat

Fine if you believe that. Close Dunstans too. It's unacceptable to just traffic calm one residential road at the direct expense of the neighbouring residential road. All this scheme is designed to do is turn a small residential road that is no wider than Ryedale into a main road. And as I understand it the reason that Ryedale doesn't have proper humps and so it's a cut through is that Ryedale residents in the past have objected to them being possibly too noisy! Come back to me as a Dunstans resident once you are up for proper humps going in on Ryedale and there's still a problem. I don't own a car, I just don't want to live on a main road for your convenience and luxury.

Agreed but it seems very unlikely given their attitude to date that they will agree to amend anything until the ETO ultimately expires. They could have announced an ETO and said we will run the initial statutory six months consultation on the current layout and then consider next steps after six months. Instead the impression I have is this is permanent until July 27, not least cos they have no funding to change it. That semi permanence without prior consultation is the cause of the anger in my view. Anyhow I guess we wait to see what happens next.

Except it will be July 2027 before Dunstans Road has any hope of relief if I am right and the traffic engineers themselves seem to think I am... The biggest problem with what the council has done is the length of the proposed ETO. They are using the full period without prior consultation and knowing there will be material negative externalities. I hope they think again and at least shorten the initial trial to 6 months.

Fair enough but is the solution to turn the parallel section of Dunstans into a main road? And if the idea is to just gamble and see if you can traffic calm Ryedale without making living on Dunstans an absolute misery, the scheme should have been limited to the statutory six months in the first instance.

The debate seems to have got quite off topic. The council has tried to implement a scheme that their own internal documents envisage will damage other roads in the area. Surely the sensible thing for the council to do at this point is take a step back and think about how it implements the scheme in a more sensible way (or if it can't, scraps it and starts again). To my mind the most obvious starting point would surely be to install proper humps on Ryedale as per Dunstans and then the council assesses what else is needed to calm Ryedale after that. Any ETO can be 6 months rather than 18.

Leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the AI summaries, has anyone actually had a substantive response from the council on next steps? Personally I'm fine with them trying to do some traffic calming as long as it's done in the round and with some warning and consultation. Unlike this proposal.

This is clearly false. "The scheme is experimental, showing a proportionate, “test‑and‑learn” approach. Rather than implementing a permanent change, the council intends to monitor effects and adapt accordingly." The ETO has obviously been used to avoid consulting in advance and so I have zero faith they have any intention of modifying it. You are willfully blind to the obvious procedural failings. If they actually wanted to do the above, they could have limited the initial period to the six months required for the statutory consultation. Not to mention the failure to follow statutory guidance that recommends informal consultation in advance to avoid exactly the issue shown by this thread.

I'd be content if the council had introduced a scheme that was fair and treated everyone sensibly. However, this intervention is clearly aimed solely at displacing as much traffic as possible from Ryedale onto the parallel section of Dunstans Road at the expense of Dunstans residents. The council's own correspondence makes this very clear. Any solution should have holistically covered St Aidens, Dunstans and Ryedale as well as Balchier and Cornflower. So I don't see any need to moderate my views on the matter!

My post service has totally collapsed over the last two weeks. But bizarrely I received loads of old mail from January today (ie on a Sunday..?!)