40,000 drivers now fined over Lendal Bridge ban

York Press: 40,000 drivers now fined over Lendal Bridge ban 40,000 drivers now fined over Lendal Bridge ban

THE number of drivers issued with fines for breaching the rules of a York city-centre bridge’s traffic trial now tops 40,000.

City of York Council’s figures for December show 6,233 penalty charge notices (PCNs) were sent to the owners of private vehicles who used Lendal Bridge between 10.30am and 5pm, as the controversial experiment reached the four-month point.

It brings the total number of £60 fines issued since the six-month trial began on August 27 to 40,794.

The December update shows slightly increased journey times for two of York’s Park&Ride services heading out of the city-centre, compared with December 2012, and Park&Ride buses heading to York Designer Outlet taking more than three minutes longer.

However, the assessment said journey times for four out of five Park&Ride services travelling into the city fell year on year in December, with “significant” time reductions both ways on the Rawcliffe Bar route.

It claimed Christmas traffic and new lights at the A64 Fulford Interchange were the chief cause of the delays on the outbound Designer Outlet service.

The trial runs until February 27, after which its impact will be studied.

The Labour-led council says it will speed up bus journeys, cut pollution and encourage more people to walk, cycle or use public transport, but critics claim fines issued to visitors will turn people away from York and city-centre businesses are being damaged, with congestion being caused elsewhere in York. The latest PCN figures run from December 2 to 29.

Year-on-year traffic figures showed more motorists using the Outer Ring Road in December - reversing the trend from previous months - and an average of 162 more vehicles using Clifton Bridge every hour.

There were annual increases in traffic levels on Foss Islands Road, Tadcaster Road and Shipton Road, with volumes falling on Fulford Road, Hull Road, Boroughbridge Road and Malton Road. Leeman Road’s hourly traffic level rose compared to July, when counters were installed.

Studying the Clifton Bridge and Foss Islands Road figures, the report said: “The off-peak period is busier than during an average month, which may be expected in the run-up to Christmas”.

It also said traffic increases on Foss Islands Road were “far less than during previous months.”

Comments (69)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:54am Thu 16 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless. CaroleBaines

10:08am Thu 16 Jan 14

Knavesmire view says...

In comparing December 2012 to December 2013 they are blaming Christmas traffic?

Yes because there has never been a Christmas until 2013 has there?

Seriously, their excuses get more and more desperate and rediculous!
In comparing December 2012 to December 2013 they are blaming Christmas traffic? Yes because there has never been a Christmas until 2013 has there? Seriously, their excuses get more and more desperate and rediculous! Knavesmire view

10:12am Thu 16 Jan 14

Madasanibbotson says...

Maybe the traffic has increased due to CYC staff working longer hours to click the thumbs down on anything that the CYC don't like.
Maybe the traffic has increased due to CYC staff working longer hours to click the thumbs down on anything that the CYC don't like. Madasanibbotson

10:18am Thu 16 Jan 14

YorkPatrol says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
"Still think the idea of closure is sound"

What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world? YorkPatrol

10:31am Thu 16 Jan 14

Woody G Mellor says...

YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
"Still think the idea of closure is sound"

What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?
I totally agree with YorkPatrol.

* Well, there is a first time for everything*.
[quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?[/p][/quote]I totally agree with YorkPatrol. * Well, there is a first time for everything*. Woody G Mellor

10:35am Thu 16 Jan 14

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

Of course the Designer Outlet Park&Ride buses are being delayed on Fulford Road: all the south and westbound traffic that used to use Lendal Bridge has to go that way now. A CoYC traffic officer told me before the sorry mess started that the closure would "add 10 minutes" to my journey to Leeds. It doesn't: it adds 45 minutes - so it shows what a useless traffic officer he is. He probably fits into the team perfectly.

And aren't the council forgetting something? The P&R service is for people who live outside the city. What about those of us who live INSIDE the city? I don't give a stuff if it's quicker for someone who doesn't live here to get in and out quicker: what about ME? It's (a lot) slower and worse for me - and I live here!

And those weasel words keep coming. The closure doesn't 'encourage' anyone to walk - it forces them!
Of course the Designer Outlet Park&Ride buses are being delayed on Fulford Road: all the south and westbound traffic that used to use Lendal Bridge has to go that way now. A CoYC traffic officer told me before the sorry mess started that the closure would "add 10 minutes" to my journey to Leeds. It doesn't: it adds 45 minutes - so it shows what a useless traffic officer he is. He probably fits into the team perfectly. And aren't the council forgetting something? The P&R service is for people who live outside the city. What about those of us who live INSIDE the city? I don't give a stuff if it's quicker for someone who doesn't live here to get in and out quicker: what about ME? It's (a lot) slower and worse for me - and I live here! And those weasel words keep coming. The closure doesn't 'encourage' anyone to walk - it forces them! Ignatius Lumpopo

10:54am Thu 16 Jan 14

Kevin Turvey says...

‘Ignatius Lumpopo says...
. What about those of us who live INSIDE the city? I don't give a stuff if it's quicker for someone who doesn't live here to get in and out quicker: what about ME? It's (a lot) slower and worse for me - and I live here!’

Exactly, we as York Council tax payers pay these idiots for our own and others external to the city’s misery!

York Council seems to have forgotten who actually provides the money that they waste on self-interest/confli
ct of interest projects.

Merret and Alexander resign NOW!

In my opinion they are not fit or competent to hold any public office.

At the next local elections make the effort to turn up and use your democratic rights to either vote them out by voting for any party that is not the big three (your choice of extremism) or spoil your paper, that is the only way that the message will be understood and acted on!
‘Ignatius Lumpopo says... . What about those of us who live INSIDE the city? I don't give a stuff if it's quicker for someone who doesn't live here to get in and out quicker: what about ME? It's (a lot) slower and worse for me - and I live here!’ Exactly, we as York Council tax payers pay these idiots for our own and others external to the city’s misery! York Council seems to have forgotten who actually provides the money that they waste on self-interest/confli ct of interest projects. Merret and Alexander resign NOW! In my opinion they are not fit or competent to hold any public office. At the next local elections make the effort to turn up and use your democratic rights to either vote them out by voting for any party that is not the big three (your choice of extremism) or spoil your paper, that is the only way that the message will be understood and acted on! Kevin Turvey

11:15am Thu 16 Jan 14

Lunatic says...

I'm against the closure, because its intent is simply undefined.

But I'm also of the mind that if people miss the road marking on the approach to the bridge then they're driving without due care and attention, and they deserve to be fined on those grounds alone. If they're missing the huge solid white line, the enormous "Bus Lane" and "Restricted Access" scrawled numerous times across the road, then what else are they not paying attention to whilst they're driving?
I'm against the closure, because its intent is simply undefined. But I'm also of the mind that if people miss the road marking on the approach to the bridge then they're driving without due care and attention, and they deserve to be fined on those grounds alone. If they're missing the huge solid white line, the enormous "Bus Lane" and "Restricted Access" scrawled numerous times across the road, then what else are they not paying attention to whilst they're driving? Lunatic

11:16am Thu 16 Jan 14

wildthing666 says...

£2.4 million into the council purse in four months, that's if they all pay the £60, or £1.2 million if they all pay the lower fine. before this all started we got a plan of what the surrounding area would look like after the 6 months trial, just like the city centre this is one big stitch up that will go through undebated after the 6 months trial.
£2.4 million into the council purse in four months, that's if they all pay the £60, or £1.2 million if they all pay the lower fine. before this all started we got a plan of what the surrounding area would look like after the 6 months trial, just like the city centre this is one big stitch up that will go through undebated after the 6 months trial. wildthing666

11:24am Thu 16 Jan 14

Bo Jolly says...

I'm afraid that come the next election the fallout from this stupid scheme will come home to haunt Labour and, as a Labour voter, that saddens me. Why is the single most controversial act of a Labour council a scheme to create congestion? Why not, say, introducing cheap flat rate bus fares? Or refusing to slash services in the face of Tory cuts? Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing instead of the rank stupidity of closing a chunk of the ring road in an already congested city, adversely impacting many of the working people who are their core voters?
I'm afraid that come the next election the fallout from this stupid scheme will come home to haunt Labour and, as a Labour voter, that saddens me. Why is the single most controversial act of a Labour council a scheme to create congestion? Why not, say, introducing cheap flat rate bus fares? Or refusing to slash services in the face of Tory cuts? Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing instead of the rank stupidity of closing a chunk of the ring road in an already congested city, adversely impacting many of the working people who are their core voters? Bo Jolly

11:30am Thu 16 Jan 14

Madasanibbotson says...

Bo Jolly wrote:
I'm afraid that come the next election the fallout from this stupid scheme will come home to haunt Labour and, as a Labour voter, that saddens me. Why is the single most controversial act of a Labour council a scheme to create congestion? Why not, say, introducing cheap flat rate bus fares? Or refusing to slash services in the face of Tory cuts? Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing instead of the rank stupidity of closing a chunk of the ring road in an already congested city, adversely impacting many of the working people who are their core voters?
You have to consider that "the leader" of the Labour party in York can't even manage his own bank account, so thinking of creative ways to reduce costs and improve the lives of the council tax payer isn't possible.
[quote][p][bold]Bo Jolly[/bold] wrote: I'm afraid that come the next election the fallout from this stupid scheme will come home to haunt Labour and, as a Labour voter, that saddens me. Why is the single most controversial act of a Labour council a scheme to create congestion? Why not, say, introducing cheap flat rate bus fares? Or refusing to slash services in the face of Tory cuts? Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing instead of the rank stupidity of closing a chunk of the ring road in an already congested city, adversely impacting many of the working people who are their core voters?[/p][/quote]You have to consider that "the leader" of the Labour party in York can't even manage his own bank account, so thinking of creative ways to reduce costs and improve the lives of the council tax payer isn't possible. Madasanibbotson

11:50am Thu 16 Jan 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Bo Jolly wrote:
I'm afraid that come the next election the fallout from this stupid scheme will come home to haunt Labour and, as a Labour voter, that saddens me. Why is the single most controversial act of a Labour council a scheme to create congestion? Why not, say, introducing cheap flat rate bus fares? Or refusing to slash services in the face of Tory cuts? Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing instead of the rank stupidity of closing a chunk of the ring road in an already congested city, adversely impacting many of the working people who are their core voters?
"Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing "
Because Labour long ago abandoned socialism in favour of being watered down Tories.
[quote][p][bold]Bo Jolly[/bold] wrote: I'm afraid that come the next election the fallout from this stupid scheme will come home to haunt Labour and, as a Labour voter, that saddens me. Why is the single most controversial act of a Labour council a scheme to create congestion? Why not, say, introducing cheap flat rate bus fares? Or refusing to slash services in the face of Tory cuts? Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing instead of the rank stupidity of closing a chunk of the ring road in an already congested city, adversely impacting many of the working people who are their core voters?[/p][/quote]"Or *something* that might be considered radical or left-wing " Because Labour long ago abandoned socialism in favour of being watered down Tories. Pinza-C55

11:53am Thu 16 Jan 14

24.2.1969bestcitygoalever... says...

York needs a big plan. Looking forward to what is needed in 20/30 years' time. It's not the only city overwhelmed by traffic in Europe in need of practical solutions. Many, much larger cities are planning completely traffic-free centres but this needs big thinking and good alternatives need to be given to citizens that need to get from A to B for whatever purpose. The medieval & general historical features of York will (hopefully) never be changed so something truly innovative is required. All aspects should be addressed over time, not just one.
York needs a big plan. Looking forward to what is needed in 20/30 years' time. It's not the only city overwhelmed by traffic in Europe in need of practical solutions. Many, much larger cities are planning completely traffic-free centres but this needs big thinking and good alternatives need to be given to citizens that need to get from A to B for whatever purpose. The medieval & general historical features of York will (hopefully) never be changed so something truly innovative is required. All aspects should be addressed over time, not just one. 24.2.1969bestcitygoalever...

11:54am Thu 16 Jan 14

m dee says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
Thing is its not a proper closure it Discriminates,patien
ts using Hospital transport to go for treatment for example have to take a much longer route while a road-train vehicle,taxis and other non essential vehicles are free to use the bridge.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]Thing is its not a proper closure it Discriminates,patien ts using Hospital transport to go for treatment for example have to take a much longer route while a road-train vehicle,taxis and other non essential vehicles are free to use the bridge. m dee

12:11pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Dave Ruddock says...

I am still totally confused, the cost of signage, courts, administration, then the lack of correct laws etc, local companies and those further afield being damaged, and now I hear Clarence Street my be widened, what for Busses or Ambulances, ar Gillygats can not be widened so Why on Planet Earth is widening a street that has no impact on buses. AND AS THE COUNCIL KNOW buses run to a timetable Not Council wishs. One thing that will help is More Police to ensure traffic runs and penalise the people that park on Yellow lines at and at traffic lights, thats (PARK) at Lights. (Private USP, PARCEL FORCE etc etc
I am still totally confused, the cost of signage, courts, administration, then the lack of correct laws etc, local companies and those further afield being damaged, and now I hear Clarence Street my be widened, what for Busses or Ambulances, ar Gillygats can not be widened so Why on Planet Earth is widening a street that has no impact on buses. AND AS THE COUNCIL KNOW buses run to a timetable Not Council wishs. One thing that will help is More Police to ensure traffic runs and penalise the people that park on Yellow lines at and at traffic lights, thats (PARK) at Lights. (Private USP, PARCEL FORCE etc etc Dave Ruddock

12:43pm Thu 16 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
"Still think the idea of closure is sound"

What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?
Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.
[quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?[/p][/quote]Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads. CaroleBaines

12:47pm Thu 16 Jan 14

MorkofYork says...

I don't think the slight reduction in traffic is worth the amount of people being fined. The traffic hasn't disappeared, it's still on other roads.

The trial is a failure.

The problem is it's never just a trail with our seedy bunch, it's all part of a bigger plan so they won't allow it to fail even if it should.
I don't think the slight reduction in traffic is worth the amount of people being fined. The traffic hasn't disappeared, it's still on other roads. The trial is a failure. The problem is it's never just a trail with our seedy bunch, it's all part of a bigger plan so they won't allow it to fail even if it should. MorkofYork

1:09pm Thu 16 Jan 14

WhyEver says...

MorkofYork wrote:
I don't think the slight reduction in traffic is worth the amount of people being fined. The traffic hasn't disappeared, it's still on other roads.

The trial is a failure.

The problem is it's never just a trail with our seedy bunch, it's all part of a bigger plan so they won't allow it to fail even if it should.
Too true, this has always been a cynical move to push traffic and pollution away from Lendal and into residential areas around Clifton, Fulford, Hull Road, Layerthorpe. The council's map of alternatives pretends the whole Foss Islands side of the ring road is dual carriageway, and these progress reports talk of "coping well" with increased traffic.

The number of fines has come to dominate all coverage of this trial closure, I predict the council will claim they can fix that and press ahead with a permanent closure, ignoring the effects on residents.
[quote][p][bold]MorkofYork[/bold] wrote: I don't think the slight reduction in traffic is worth the amount of people being fined. The traffic hasn't disappeared, it's still on other roads. The trial is a failure. The problem is it's never just a trail with our seedy bunch, it's all part of a bigger plan so they won't allow it to fail even if it should.[/p][/quote]Too true, this has always been a cynical move to push traffic and pollution away from Lendal and into residential areas around Clifton, Fulford, Hull Road, Layerthorpe. The council's map of alternatives pretends the whole Foss Islands side of the ring road is dual carriageway, and these progress reports talk of "coping well" with increased traffic. The number of fines has come to dominate all coverage of this trial closure, I predict the council will claim they can fix that and press ahead with a permanent closure, ignoring the effects on residents. WhyEver

1:20pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Richard Catton says...

Completely agree that the current regime has to be voted out of existence come 2015. However voting for minority parties isn't the answer.
Sadly, there is now so little, in terms of doctrine, separating the main parties at local government level that your personal party leanings no longer come into it.
It would best for all to agree on a main party to support and then vote them in.
However that support comes on the understanding that if you behave in the despotic way Labour has behaved you will only get one term in power then you will be annihilated at the next local election and we will ensure the main culprits lose their seats for ever in York.
Completely agree that the current regime has to be voted out of existence come 2015. However voting for minority parties isn't the answer. Sadly, there is now so little, in terms of doctrine, separating the main parties at local government level that your personal party leanings no longer come into it. It would best for all to agree on a main party to support and then vote them in. However that support comes on the understanding that if you behave in the despotic way Labour has behaved you will only get one term in power then you will be annihilated at the next local election and we will ensure the main culprits lose their seats for ever in York. Richard Catton

1:23pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Richard Catton says...

I agree that the Labour group must be wiped from the face of York politics in 2015 however voting for minority parties is not the answer.
Sadly, there is now so little, in terms of doctrine, separating the main parties at local government level that your personal party leanings no longer come into it.
It would best for voters to agree on a main party to support and then vote them in.
However that support comes on the understanding that if you behave in the despotic way Labour has behaved you will only get one term in power then you will be annihilated at the next local election and we will ensure the main culprits lose their seats for ever in York.
I agree that the Labour group must be wiped from the face of York politics in 2015 however voting for minority parties is not the answer. Sadly, there is now so little, in terms of doctrine, separating the main parties at local government level that your personal party leanings no longer come into it. It would best for voters to agree on a main party to support and then vote them in. However that support comes on the understanding that if you behave in the despotic way Labour has behaved you will only get one term in power then you will be annihilated at the next local election and we will ensure the main culprits lose their seats for ever in York. Richard Catton

1:30pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

figures get manipulated to say whatever people want. Lets face it york traffic is rubbish and the closure has simply diverted that elsewhere and caused confusion and a bad rep for people visiting. besides who even uses busses? wonder how much extra pollution this has contributed to york city centre from people having to drive around a 15min divert that is tail backed... city run by greedy tards....
figures get manipulated to say whatever people want. Lets face it york traffic is rubbish and the closure has simply diverted that elsewhere and caused confusion and a bad rep for people visiting. besides who even uses busses? wonder how much extra pollution this has contributed to york city centre from people having to drive around a 15min divert that is tail backed... city run by greedy tards.... Archiebold the 1st

1:30pm Thu 16 Jan 14

mike.......durkin says...

so i shud be band ...we all pay car tax for the road so its shud be open for all cars. it shud be free
so i shud be band ...we all pay car tax for the road so its shud be open for all cars. it shud be free mike.......durkin

1:35pm Thu 16 Jan 14

YorkPatrol says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?
Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.
No, but we can keep the ones we have open..
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?[/p][/quote]Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.[/p][/quote]No, but we can keep the ones we have open.. YorkPatrol

1:44pm Thu 16 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?
Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.
No, but we can keep the ones we have open..
I would suggest that as the number of vehicles on the roads increase, we will experience more and more queues. The way round that, only in my unselfish opinion, is to get public transport that people will actually want to use. And can afford to use.

If you think that is being narrow minded, elfish and living in my own little world, then so be it, but I would say that was unfair, personally. I have been inconvenienced by the closure - living out towards Bishopthorpe Rd and not being able to cross the city via Lendal Bridge is a pain. But so are all the queues I get stuck in and if this experiment is a step towards no being so dependent on the car, I will reluctantly see it out.

What I do object to is the totally useless signage. Its appalling to expect visitors to know which is Lendal Bridge and the amazing fine stats show the Council have made a grave error.

Anyway. My worthless opinion!
[quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?[/p][/quote]Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.[/p][/quote]No, but we can keep the ones we have open..[/p][/quote]I would suggest that as the number of vehicles on the roads increase, we will experience more and more queues. The way round that, only in my unselfish opinion, is to get public transport that people will actually want to use. And can afford to use. If you think that is being narrow minded, elfish and living in my own little world, then so be it, but I would say that was unfair, personally. I have been inconvenienced by the closure - living out towards Bishopthorpe Rd and not being able to cross the city via Lendal Bridge is a pain. But so are all the queues I get stuck in and if this experiment is a step towards no being so dependent on the car, I will reluctantly see it out. What I do object to is the totally useless signage. Its appalling to expect visitors to know which is Lendal Bridge and the amazing fine stats show the Council have made a grave error. Anyway. My worthless opinion! CaroleBaines

1:58pm Thu 16 Jan 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

The monthly report is full of manipulated results (cherry picked) to meet the needs of the councils ideology.

(It also said traffic increases on Foss Islands Road were “far less than during previous months"). What…????, does this mean traffic volume is still increasing on Foss Islands Road.

You cannot remove a key part of the inner ring road without having a negative result which is affecting more people than it is benefitting.

Increased journey times and costs for most residents are not acceptable although completely and conveniently ignored.

New car sales have seen a massive increase, what is that telling us at a time when people are struggling, public transport is not a workable option, neither is cycling or walking which are leisure not business pursuits for many.

Look forward to the councils Brown Shirts spending time marking down all the postings that don't agree with them.
The monthly report is full of manipulated results (cherry picked) to meet the needs of the councils ideology. (It also said traffic increases on Foss Islands Road were “far less than during previous months"). What…????, does this mean traffic volume is still increasing on Foss Islands Road. You cannot remove a key part of the inner ring road without having a negative result which is affecting more people than it is benefitting. Increased journey times and costs for most residents are not acceptable although completely and conveniently ignored. New car sales have seen a massive increase, what is that telling us at a time when people are struggling, public transport is not a workable option, neither is cycling or walking which are leisure not business pursuits for many. Look forward to the councils Brown Shirts spending time marking down all the postings that don't agree with them. YOUWILLDOASISAY

2:00pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Alf Garnett says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
so i shud be band ...we all pay car tax for the road so its shud be open for all cars. it shud be free
Like educashun ?
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: so i shud be band ...we all pay car tax for the road so its shud be open for all cars. it shud be free[/p][/quote]Like educashun ? Alf Garnett

2:19pm Thu 16 Jan 14

the original Homer says...

It would be interesting to see the 40000 tickets in the context of previous traffic numbers.

Useful numbers would be:

How many vehicles used the bridge in each month in the trial period and times (presumably the 40000 plus all the exempted ones)
How many vehicles used the brdige in like-for-like months of 2012

Then we can see the scale of reduction of traffic, and we can see the "offenders" as a percentage.

We know the signs are rubbish, but are they being missed by 1%, 10%, 50%? - Then we can take a fairer view of bad signs vs careless driving.
It would be interesting to see the 40000 tickets in the context of previous traffic numbers. Useful numbers would be: How many vehicles used the bridge in each month in the trial period and times (presumably the 40000 plus all the exempted ones) How many vehicles used the brdige in like-for-like months of 2012 Then we can see the scale of reduction of traffic, and we can see the "offenders" as a percentage. We know the signs are rubbish, but are they being missed by 1%, 10%, 50%? - Then we can take a fairer view of bad signs vs careless driving. the original Homer

2:22pm Thu 16 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

I would like to know how many of the 40,000 pay up!
I would like to know how many of the 40,000 pay up! CaroleBaines

2:25pm Thu 16 Jan 14

bloodaxe says...

Another week, another shock-horror bridge story. Yawn. As for voting-out the current administration, fine - no problem. Though I seem to recall that these pages were full of vituperative indignation at the LibDems when they held sway. So if the Tories get in it won't be long before we're all screaming for their leader's blood. Do bear in mind though, that a majority of Tory local authorities are opposed to the cuts of the national government, so don't expect a cut in council tax. You will however be able to drive down The Shambles and park in the Museum Gardens.
Another week, another shock-horror bridge story. Yawn. As for voting-out the current administration, fine - no problem. Though I seem to recall that these pages were full of vituperative indignation at the LibDems when they held sway. So if the Tories get in it won't be long before we're all screaming for their leader's blood. Do bear in mind though, that a majority of Tory local authorities are opposed to the cuts of the national government, so don't expect a cut in council tax. You will however be able to drive down The Shambles and park in the Museum Gardens. bloodaxe

2:38pm Thu 16 Jan 14

york_chap says...

"It claimed Christmas traffic AND NEW LIGHTS at the A64 Fulford Interchange were the chief cause of the delays ". So finally the council is acknowledging that much of the congestion in York is caused by its badly phased (and in many cases completely unnecessary) traffic lights. Something which many of us citizens have been pointing out for years.

I appreciate that some drivers have been fined more than once, but given that 40,000 equates to 0.1% of all registered drivers in the whole of the UK (including those who don't actually use their licence), something is clearly going wrong here.
"It claimed Christmas traffic AND NEW LIGHTS at the A64 Fulford Interchange were the chief cause of the delays ". So finally the council is acknowledging that much of the congestion in York is caused by its badly phased (and in many cases completely unnecessary) traffic lights. Something which many of us citizens have been pointing out for years. I appreciate that some drivers have been fined more than once, but given that 40,000 equates to 0.1% of all registered drivers in the whole of the UK (including those who don't actually use their licence), something is clearly going wrong here. york_chap

3:43pm Thu 16 Jan 14

spiritofyork says...

and now many cyclists are breaching this law too? Why arent they getting fined?? Them and the Labour lot need to clear out. enough is enough.
and now many cyclists are breaching this law too? Why arent they getting fined?? Them and the Labour lot need to clear out. enough is enough. spiritofyork

3:47pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Can't all be wrong says...

YCC don't seem to accept that York is a compact historic city in a predominatly rural county. The outlying villages and market towns feed in thousands of commuters on a daily basis. That is not going to change anytime soon unless there are credible alternatives to the car, and yes I accept that is a huge problem. But closing major routes through the city, which where considered essential in the Victorian era is absurd. If Lendal was required to ease traffic in an era of the horse and cart, it's certainly essential today. Far more expertise and imagination is required to manage the traffic in York, let's start with acknowledged bottle necks, Fulford Road lights, Hospital Field Road lights. But why do I feel I am wasting my time commenting on the **** obvious!
YCC don't seem to accept that York is a compact historic city in a predominatly rural county. The outlying villages and market towns feed in thousands of commuters on a daily basis. That is not going to change anytime soon unless there are credible alternatives to the car, and yes I accept that is a huge problem. But closing major routes through the city, which where considered essential in the Victorian era is absurd. If Lendal was required to ease traffic in an era of the horse and cart, it's certainly essential today. Far more expertise and imagination is required to manage the traffic in York, let's start with acknowledged bottle necks, Fulford Road lights, Hospital Field Road lights. But why do I feel I am wasting my time commenting on the **** obvious! Can't all be wrong

4:01pm Thu 16 Jan 14

The OX says...

Well they wanted to reduce traffic in York, so this year there will be 40.000 less cars coming back to our City, then YCC will start counting the cost to shops and tourists places well done guys, Kn@b Heads
Well they wanted to reduce traffic in York, so this year there will be 40.000 less cars coming back to our City, then YCC will start counting the cost to shops and tourists places well done guys, Kn@b Heads The OX

4:04pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Local lassie says...

Sorry but if the signage is as adequate as some are making out there shouldn't be so many drivers getting caught out, one or two maybe but not 40,000+. There's no big bus lane sign coming from Bootham/Gillgate, just a collection of signs saying different things at the junction - and Lendal Bridge Closed will mean absolutely nothing if you don't know what or where Lendal Bridge is! When you are driving towards the junction you are mostly committed, you can't just stop to read the signs when there's a queue of traffic up your backside and then change direction. Access to Blake street is restricted once you've got to the Theatre so what choice have people got? If they ignore the access only sign and go down Blake Street the right turn reinstatement out of Lendal has not been widely advertised so if you'd been to York previously you'd only expect to be sent over the bridge from there anyway - as I learnt when I had a conversation with some tourists who had previously visited York years ago, they had been fined £30 for using the bridge that day and were trying to work out how they could have avoided it - "what a cash con that is" according to them and I had to agree. And as for the flashing sign by Leeman Road - that's on the far side of the junction and appears to direct traffic into the bus lane - and that's another junction where you have 2 lanes, do you cause an accident by suddenly turning left when you are in the straight ahead lane? So badly thought out. I live here and even I'm confused by all the yellow signs and arrows!
Sorry but if the signage is as adequate as some are making out there shouldn't be so many drivers getting caught out, one or two maybe but not 40,000+. There's no big bus lane sign coming from Bootham/Gillgate, just a collection of signs saying different things at the junction - and Lendal Bridge Closed will mean absolutely nothing if you don't know what or where Lendal Bridge is! When you are driving towards the junction you are mostly committed, you can't just stop to read the signs when there's a queue of traffic up your backside and then change direction. Access to Blake street is restricted once you've got to the Theatre so what choice have people got? If they ignore the access only sign and go down Blake Street the right turn reinstatement out of Lendal has not been widely advertised so if you'd been to York previously you'd only expect to be sent over the bridge from there anyway - as I learnt when I had a conversation with some tourists who had previously visited York years ago, they had been fined £30 for using the bridge that day and were trying to work out how they could have avoided it - "what a cash con that is" according to them and I had to agree. And as for the flashing sign by Leeman Road - that's on the far side of the junction and appears to direct traffic into the bus lane - and that's another junction where you have 2 lanes, do you cause an accident by suddenly turning left when you are in the straight ahead lane? So badly thought out. I live here and even I'm confused by all the yellow signs and arrows! Local lassie

4:34pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Richard Catton says...

Lunatic wrote:
I'm against the closure, because its intent is simply undefined. But I'm also of the mind that if people miss the road marking on the approach to the bridge then they're driving without due care and attention, and they deserve to be fined on those grounds alone. If they're missing the huge solid white line, the enormous "Bus Lane" and "Restricted Access" scrawled numerous times across the road, then what else are they not paying attention to whilst they're driving?
Maybe they're paying attention to the bus up their ****, or the pedestrains wandering in the road near Museum Gardens, or the delivery lorries at Pizza Express, or avoiding the cyclists, or thinking "which one is Lendal Bridge" or asking themselves "What the Hell does restricted acces mean? Does that mean me?"
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: I'm against the closure, because its intent is simply undefined. But I'm also of the mind that if people miss the road marking on the approach to the bridge then they're driving without due care and attention, and they deserve to be fined on those grounds alone. If they're missing the huge solid white line, the enormous "Bus Lane" and "Restricted Access" scrawled numerous times across the road, then what else are they not paying attention to whilst they're driving?[/p][/quote]Maybe they're paying attention to the bus up their ****, or the pedestrains wandering in the road near Museum Gardens, or the delivery lorries at Pizza Express, or avoiding the cyclists, or thinking "which one is Lendal Bridge" or asking themselves "What the Hell does restricted acces mean? Does that mean me?" Richard Catton

4:55pm Thu 16 Jan 14

CaroleBaines says...

Richard Catton wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
I'm against the closure, because its intent is simply undefined. But I'm also of the mind that if people miss the road marking on the approach to the bridge then they're driving without due care and attention, and they deserve to be fined on those grounds alone. If they're missing the huge solid white line, the enormous "Bus Lane" and "Restricted Access" scrawled numerous times across the road, then what else are they not paying attention to whilst they're driving?
Maybe they're paying attention to the bus up their ****, or the pedestrains wandering in the road near Museum Gardens, or the delivery lorries at Pizza Express, or avoiding the cyclists, or thinking "which one is Lendal Bridge" or asking themselves "What the Hell does restricted acces mean? Does that mean me?"
Oh I love this one! Quite right too.
[quote][p][bold]Richard Catton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: I'm against the closure, because its intent is simply undefined. But I'm also of the mind that if people miss the road marking on the approach to the bridge then they're driving without due care and attention, and they deserve to be fined on those grounds alone. If they're missing the huge solid white line, the enormous "Bus Lane" and "Restricted Access" scrawled numerous times across the road, then what else are they not paying attention to whilst they're driving?[/p][/quote]Maybe they're paying attention to the bus up their ****, or the pedestrains wandering in the road near Museum Gardens, or the delivery lorries at Pizza Express, or avoiding the cyclists, or thinking "which one is Lendal Bridge" or asking themselves "What the Hell does restricted acces mean? Does that mean me?"[/p][/quote]Oh I love this one! Quite right too. CaroleBaines

5:06pm Thu 16 Jan 14

ouseswimmer says...

How about a radical idea? A toll of £3 to cross the bridge if driving. Then everyone will be happy. To cross or
How about a radical idea? A toll of £3 to cross the bridge if driving. Then everyone will be happy. To cross or ouseswimmer

5:11pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Caecilius says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
No, a lot of them broke the rules quite deliberately, as a lot of motorists break other rules quite deliberately on a daily basis. They probably assumed that, as usual, they'ld just get away with it.

Keep the fines coming. Maybe the lesson will sink in.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]No, a lot of them broke the rules quite deliberately, as a lot of motorists break other rules quite deliberately on a daily basis. They probably assumed that, as usual, they'ld just get away with it. Keep the fines coming. Maybe the lesson will sink in. Caecilius

6:12pm Thu 16 Jan 14

chelk says...

Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues
Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues chelk

7:45pm Thu 16 Jan 14

cityman29 says...

A friend who works for parking informed me the council are planning on keeping lendal closed after the trial, from 7 am till 7 pm each day. Also the council are getting a mobile camera car to catch people parked up outside schools
A friend who works for parking informed me the council are planning on keeping lendal closed after the trial, from 7 am till 7 pm each day. Also the council are getting a mobile camera car to catch people parked up outside schools cityman29

7:50pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Madasanibbotson says...

Madasanibbotson wrote:
Maybe the traffic has increased due to CYC staff working longer hours to click the thumbs down on anything that the CYC don't like.
4PM Plus 40
7pm Minus 55

Guess CYC staff must be on overtime to reverse the votes again.
[quote][p][bold]Madasanibbotson[/bold] wrote: Maybe the traffic has increased due to CYC staff working longer hours to click the thumbs down on anything that the CYC don't like.[/p][/quote]4PM Plus 40 7pm Minus 55 Guess CYC staff must be on overtime to reverse the votes again. Madasanibbotson

7:52pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
I wasnt going to comment on this anymore because i felt it a waste of time, but your comment is absolutely right, spot on.
I said similar to this when the figure was c26,000 again when it was c34,000 and now it's 40,000, but still nobody listens, we get numptys banging on about drivers driving without due care and attention!!!!!, give me strength.
Also you get the commenters who say there is no increase in congestion in other parts of the city, well they should have been sat in my car at around 3.45 this afternoon, I had been to a meeting in Harrogate, drove back into the city via the A59, not too bad till I got to the mount and turned down Scarcroft Road, that's where it started, was stuck in stop start traffic all the way to Bishopthorpe Road and all the way to Nunnery Lane, and as I turned into Nunnery Lane you could see Skeldergate Bridge was stop start, so headed up Nunnery Lane across to the Station, through Rougier Street, Lower Miklegate, Ouse Bridge, Nessgate, Tower Street - no traffic - and rejoined the stop start traffic at Castle Mills Bridge even beating the skip wagon I had seen as I looked across at Skeldergate Bridge, so drivers don't sit in the Skeldergate Bridge traffic go thorough town it's quicker and at least your on the move!
PS: to those who still deny there is increased congestion in other parts of the city, it's all recorded on my in-car camera!
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]I wasnt going to comment on this anymore because i felt it a waste of time, but your comment is absolutely right, spot on. I said similar to this when the figure was c26,000 again when it was c34,000 and now it's 40,000, but still nobody listens, we get numptys banging on about drivers driving without due care and attention!!!!!, give me strength. Also you get the commenters who say there is no increase in congestion in other parts of the city, well they should have been sat in my car at around 3.45 this afternoon, I had been to a meeting in Harrogate, drove back into the city via the A59, not too bad till I got to the mount and turned down Scarcroft Road, that's where it started, was stuck in stop start traffic all the way to Bishopthorpe Road and all the way to Nunnery Lane, and as I turned into Nunnery Lane you could see Skeldergate Bridge was stop start, so headed up Nunnery Lane across to the Station, through Rougier Street, Lower Miklegate, Ouse Bridge, Nessgate, Tower Street - no traffic - and rejoined the stop start traffic at Castle Mills Bridge even beating the skip wagon I had seen as I looked across at Skeldergate Bridge, so drivers don't sit in the Skeldergate Bridge traffic go thorough town it's quicker and at least your on the move! PS: to those who still deny there is increased congestion in other parts of the city, it's all recorded on my in-car camera! Igiveinthen

8:32pm Thu 16 Jan 14

JasBro says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
YorkPatrol wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?
Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.
No, but we can keep the ones we have open..
I would suggest that as the number of vehicles on the roads increase, we will experience more and more queues. The way round that, only in my unselfish opinion, is to get public transport that people will actually want to use. And can afford to use.

If you think that is being narrow minded, elfish and living in my own little world, then so be it, but I would say that was unfair, personally. I have been inconvenienced by the closure - living out towards Bishopthorpe Rd and not being able to cross the city via Lendal Bridge is a pain. But so are all the queues I get stuck in and if this experiment is a step towards no being so dependent on the car, I will reluctantly see it out.

What I do object to is the totally useless signage. Its appalling to expect visitors to know which is Lendal Bridge and the amazing fine stats show the Council have made a grave error.

Anyway. My worthless opinion!
Yes, we need better public transport, and personally I'd love to see the City centre pedestrianised.

But to make that work, we still need some way for motorists to get from A to B, without having to go to miles out of their way to get there. That just causes extra congestion, extra pollution, and extra costs for all of us.

An ideal solution would be to have some sort of Inner Ring Road which went round the edge of the city centre. :-)

But the fact is that traffic has been falling for many years, and yet congestion has been rising. Car emissions have been lowered year on year, and yet air pollution has risen.

The council's own figures say that reducing bus journey times makes very little difference to the number of people that are willing to use public transport.

We need a smarter solution. The argument should not be polarised into cars v buses v cyclists v pedestrians. It should be about what's best for York. Unfortunately, closing Lendal Bridge is not an intelligent solution.

I don't own a car so I never drive, but I still say it makes no sense at all.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]"Still think the idea of closure is sound" What, in your narrow minded, selfish and unaffected little world?[/p][/quote]Very harsh. Just in my opinion. It does effect me - I do drive. I just think cars will eventually have to withdraw from the centre - we cannot keep building more roads.[/p][/quote]No, but we can keep the ones we have open..[/p][/quote]I would suggest that as the number of vehicles on the roads increase, we will experience more and more queues. The way round that, only in my unselfish opinion, is to get public transport that people will actually want to use. And can afford to use. If you think that is being narrow minded, elfish and living in my own little world, then so be it, but I would say that was unfair, personally. I have been inconvenienced by the closure - living out towards Bishopthorpe Rd and not being able to cross the city via Lendal Bridge is a pain. But so are all the queues I get stuck in and if this experiment is a step towards no being so dependent on the car, I will reluctantly see it out. What I do object to is the totally useless signage. Its appalling to expect visitors to know which is Lendal Bridge and the amazing fine stats show the Council have made a grave error. Anyway. My worthless opinion![/p][/quote]Yes, we need better public transport, and personally I'd love to see the City centre pedestrianised. But to make that work, we still need some way for motorists to get from A to B, without having to go to miles out of their way to get there. That just causes extra congestion, extra pollution, and extra costs for all of us. An ideal solution would be to have some sort of Inner Ring Road which went round the edge of the city centre. :-) But the fact is that traffic has been falling for many years, and yet congestion has been rising. Car emissions have been lowered year on year, and yet air pollution has risen. The council's own figures say that reducing bus journey times makes very little difference to the number of people that are willing to use public transport. We need a smarter solution. The argument should not be polarised into cars v buses v cyclists v pedestrians. It should be about what's best for York. Unfortunately, closing Lendal Bridge is not an intelligent solution. I don't own a car so I never drive, but I still say it makes no sense at all. JasBro

8:49pm Thu 16 Jan 14

JasBro says...

chelk wrote:
Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues
I doubt the Press can do anything about the Scarlet Pimple. Anyone can rig the votes if they're sad enough, just delete the appropriate cookies, or go private, you can vote as many times as you like.

But don't let this pathetic situation stop you from commenting, that's exactly what they want.

Everybody knows what's going on!
[quote][p][bold]chelk[/bold] wrote: Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues[/p][/quote]I doubt the Press can do anything about the Scarlet Pimple. Anyone can rig the votes if they're sad enough, just delete the appropriate cookies, or go private, you can vote as many times as you like. But don't let this pathetic situation stop you from commenting, that's exactly what they want. Everybody knows what's going on! JasBro

8:59pm Thu 16 Jan 14

pedalling paul says...

ouseswimmer wrote:
How about a radical idea? A toll of £3 to cross the bridge if driving. Then everyone will be happy. To cross or
How about a Troll bridge, with a big hairy monster lurking beneath it, waiting to devour lawbreakers....!
[quote][p][bold]ouseswimmer[/bold] wrote: How about a radical idea? A toll of £3 to cross the bridge if driving. Then everyone will be happy. To cross or[/p][/quote]How about a Troll bridge, with a big hairy monster lurking beneath it, waiting to devour lawbreakers....! pedalling paul

10:00pm Thu 16 Jan 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

JasBro wrote:
chelk wrote:
Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues
I doubt the Press can do anything about the Scarlet Pimple. Anyone can rig the votes if they're sad enough, just delete the appropriate cookies, or go private, you can vote as many times as you like.

But don't let this pathetic situation stop you from commenting, that's exactly what they want.

Everybody knows what's going on!
Exactly.

They are trying so hard resulting in them looking stupid.

They should take the effort to make so many changes as a measure of failure and more so an indication of how far they are from a publicly supported project.

So much damage by so few people for no gain.
[quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chelk[/bold] wrote: Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues[/p][/quote]I doubt the Press can do anything about the Scarlet Pimple. Anyone can rig the votes if they're sad enough, just delete the appropriate cookies, or go private, you can vote as many times as you like. But don't let this pathetic situation stop you from commenting, that's exactly what they want. Everybody knows what's going on![/p][/quote]Exactly. They are trying so hard resulting in them looking stupid. They should take the effort to make so many changes as a measure of failure and more so an indication of how far they are from a publicly supported project. So much damage by so few people for no gain. YOUWILLDOASISAY

10:44pm Thu 16 Jan 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
JasBro wrote:
chelk wrote:
Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues
I doubt the Press can do anything about the Scarlet Pimple. Anyone can rig the votes if they're sad enough, just delete the appropriate cookies, or go private, you can vote as many times as you like.

But don't let this pathetic situation stop you from commenting, that's exactly what they want.

Everybody knows what's going on!
Exactly.

They are trying so hard resulting in them looking stupid.

They should take the effort to make so many changes as a measure of failure and more so an indication of how far they are from a publicly supported project.

So much damage by so few people for no gain.
Here mark this one down.

You can change my score but you don't have the ability to change my opinion.

You are weak.
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chelk[/bold] wrote: Do not know why people bother to comment or vote on these pages the Moronic Council supporter will be on later to manipulate all the figures whilst the Press sit and watch. This lot only have another 16 months left to mess things up. The Muppet Show continues[/p][/quote]I doubt the Press can do anything about the Scarlet Pimple. Anyone can rig the votes if they're sad enough, just delete the appropriate cookies, or go private, you can vote as many times as you like. But don't let this pathetic situation stop you from commenting, that's exactly what they want. Everybody knows what's going on![/p][/quote]Exactly. They are trying so hard resulting in them looking stupid. They should take the effort to make so many changes as a measure of failure and more so an indication of how far they are from a publicly supported project. So much damage by so few people for no gain.[/p][/quote]Here mark this one down. You can change my score but you don't have the ability to change my opinion. You are weak. YOUWILLDOASISAY

11:01pm Thu 16 Jan 14

cas540 says...

pedalling paul wrote:
ouseswimmer wrote:
How about a radical idea? A toll of £3 to cross the bridge if driving. Then everyone will be happy. To cross or
How about a Troll bridge, with a big hairy monster lurking beneath it, waiting to devour lawbreakers....!
Well Paul You wouldnt have to go far to find to find the troll would you?
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ouseswimmer[/bold] wrote: How about a radical idea? A toll of £3 to cross the bridge if driving. Then everyone will be happy. To cross or[/p][/quote]How about a Troll bridge, with a big hairy monster lurking beneath it, waiting to devour lawbreakers....![/p][/quote]Well Paul You wouldnt have to go far to find to find the troll would you? cas540

11:39pm Thu 16 Jan 14

strangebuttrue? says...

The closure of Lendal bridge appears to be ticking all the right boxes for the council. They are succeeding in putting people off coming to York in cars regardless of how much they could potentially spend when they get here. It is causing more congestion and goodness knows the council have been using this as one of their bullying tactics for years now. It must be increasing pollution so more money to come from the government to try to lower pollution which will be used on even more congestion creating bullying schemes to see if they can find a tipping point where we all abandon our cars. Well I won't be bullied and will use my car even when I don't need to because life has taught me once you give in to bullies you will always be a victim.
The closure of Lendal bridge appears to be ticking all the right boxes for the council. They are succeeding in putting people off coming to York in cars regardless of how much they could potentially spend when they get here. It is causing more congestion and goodness knows the council have been using this as one of their bullying tactics for years now. It must be increasing pollution so more money to come from the government to try to lower pollution which will be used on even more congestion creating bullying schemes to see if they can find a tipping point where we all abandon our cars. Well I won't be bullied and will use my car even when I don't need to because life has taught me once you give in to bullies you will always be a victim. strangebuttrue?

2:19am Fri 17 Jan 14

Magicman! says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
No, probably a case of "screw the signs, MY journey is more important than obeying some piece of metal".... considering how a number of York's drivers act on the roads, that is probably the more likely answer.
It's either that or 40K people are morons who can't read signs, and so are dangerous drivers.

That is the choice, either
(1) not reading signage, so careless/dangerous drivers, or
(2) arrogant drivers thinking they're above the law.
Every single correspondance from people who have been fined falls into one of those 2 categories.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]No, probably a case of "screw the signs, MY journey is more important than obeying some piece of metal".... considering how a number of York's drivers act on the roads, that is probably the more likely answer. It's either that or 40K people are morons who can't read signs, and so are dangerous drivers. That is the choice, either (1) not reading signage, so careless/dangerous drivers, or (2) arrogant drivers thinking they're above the law. Every single correspondance from people who have been fined falls into one of those 2 categories. Magicman!

8:05am Fri 17 Jan 14

Shouter says...

Yet again the voting figures have been altered. Press sort it out once and for all and stop whoever it is from hacking into your website!
Yet again the voting figures have been altered. Press sort it out once and for all and stop whoever it is from hacking into your website! Shouter

9:08am Fri 17 Jan 14

the original Homer says...

As posted earlier (JasBro 8:49PM 16/1) it is too easy for one person to vote as many times as they like.
Far more likely to be a student than a council employee really. Possibly even doing valid research into how many votes in a short space of time it takes before people realise the manipulation. Or maybe seeing what reactionary comments they can trigger.
Either way, the Press need to prevent it happening or stop displaying the vote couns completely. As it stands, the vote numbers now serve no purpose.
The timing of the negative moves is a clue - good posts tend to go positive during mornings and then negative in afternoons (when the students wake up??)
As posted earlier (JasBro 8:49PM 16/1) it is too easy for one person to vote as many times as they like. Far more likely to be a student than a council employee really. Possibly even doing valid research into how many votes in a short space of time it takes before people realise the manipulation. Or maybe seeing what reactionary comments they can trigger. Either way, the Press need to prevent it happening or stop displaying the vote couns completely. As it stands, the vote numbers now serve no purpose. The timing of the negative moves is a clue - good posts tend to go positive during mornings and then negative in afternoons (when the students wake up??) the original Homer

9:29am Fri 17 Jan 14

Madasanibbotson says...

the original Homer wrote:
As posted earlier (JasBro 8:49PM 16/1) it is too easy for one person to vote as many times as they like.
Far more likely to be a student than a council employee really. Possibly even doing valid research into how many votes in a short space of time it takes before people realise the manipulation. Or maybe seeing what reactionary comments they can trigger.
Either way, the Press need to prevent it happening or stop displaying the vote couns completely. As it stands, the vote numbers now serve no purpose.
The timing of the negative moves is a clue - good posts tend to go positive during mornings and then negative in afternoons (when the students wake up??)
FOI requests show CYC hit Facebook, Twitter and Press site 80,000 times a day Monday to Friday.
Yes press needs to get a grip and "man up" to the CYC.

THIS POST WILL OF COURSE BE REMOVED VERY QUICKLY.
[quote][p][bold]the original Homer[/bold] wrote: As posted earlier (JasBro 8:49PM 16/1) it is too easy for one person to vote as many times as they like. Far more likely to be a student than a council employee really. Possibly even doing valid research into how many votes in a short space of time it takes before people realise the manipulation. Or maybe seeing what reactionary comments they can trigger. Either way, the Press need to prevent it happening or stop displaying the vote couns completely. As it stands, the vote numbers now serve no purpose. The timing of the negative moves is a clue - good posts tend to go positive during mornings and then negative in afternoons (when the students wake up??)[/p][/quote]FOI requests show CYC hit Facebook, Twitter and Press site 80,000 times a day Monday to Friday. Yes press needs to get a grip and "man up" to the CYC. THIS POST WILL OF COURSE BE REMOVED VERY QUICKLY. Madasanibbotson

9:54am Fri 17 Jan 14

Dontfleecethetourists says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
I would like to know how many of the 40,000 pay up!
Well I know 1700 at least didn't. I was one of them. We went to appeal so more of your tax money was wasted and then the council backed down and refused to contest our appeal, as they have done with numerous cases.

This is what your dodgy council are up to, they won't even put your money in their mouths and see it through.

We have a chap who is prepared to go to court over this. He has specifically asked for a court hearing and he is not backing down.

If you are against what is happening in your city you need to go to Facebook say no to lendal bridge page and support him. His name is Denis and is appealing for a local to provide him with up to date photos.

If anyone would like to help please make yourself known.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: I would like to know how many of the 40,000 pay up![/p][/quote]Well I know 1700 at least didn't. I was one of them. We went to appeal so more of your tax money was wasted and then the council backed down and refused to contest our appeal, as they have done with numerous cases. This is what your dodgy council are up to, they won't even put your money in their mouths and see it through. We have a chap who is prepared to go to court over this. He has specifically asked for a court hearing and he is not backing down. If you are against what is happening in your city you need to go to Facebook say no to lendal bridge page and support him. His name is Denis and is appealing for a local to provide him with up to date photos. If anyone would like to help please make yourself known. Dontfleecethetourists

10:06am Fri 17 Jan 14

Dontfleecethetourists says...

Caecilius wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
No, a lot of them broke the rules quite deliberately, as a lot of motorists break other rules quite deliberately on a daily basis. They probably assumed that, as usual, they'ld just get away with it.

Keep the fines coming. Maybe the lesson will sink in.
totally disagree with that one.

Where is lendal bridge?

Oh I see. I'm a stranger in these parts but I'm expected to know.

Gee thanks mate. There's my £30. I won't be back.

Oh yes and while you are it, how about taking down the sign at the theatre , totally obscured by a bus and put it somewhere more meaningful.....like the traffic lights before you turn right for the bridge!!!!

People doing it deliberately.

Don't insult me!
[quote][p][bold]Caecilius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]No, a lot of them broke the rules quite deliberately, as a lot of motorists break other rules quite deliberately on a daily basis. They probably assumed that, as usual, they'ld just get away with it. Keep the fines coming. Maybe the lesson will sink in.[/p][/quote]totally disagree with that one. Where is lendal bridge? Oh I see. I'm a stranger in these parts but I'm expected to know. Gee thanks mate. There's my £30. I won't be back. Oh yes and while you are it, how about taking down the sign at the theatre , totally obscured by a bus and put it somewhere more meaningful.....like the traffic lights before you turn right for the bridge!!!! People doing it deliberately. Don't insult me! Dontfleecethetourists

10:12am Fri 17 Jan 14

Tricky Dickie says...

I wonder if our friends in CYC are watching what has happened in Colchester, where the council is repaying the fines to 30,000 motorists because the signage was found to be inadequate.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-ess
ex-25666021
I wonder if our friends in CYC are watching what has happened in Colchester, where the council is repaying the fines to 30,000 motorists because the signage was found to be inadequate. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-ess ex-25666021 Tricky Dickie

10:51am Fri 17 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

I have noticed a few of the commenter’s are putting forward their opinion as to the standard of the drivers issued with a PCN for crossing the “Bridge” during the restricted times, comments such as “driving without due care and attention or “dangerous driving” and I was wondering if the commenter’s where bo-na fi-de police traffic officers, who are really the only competent people to assess a drivers errors and/or take the matter further.

As Richard Catton put it re the “driving without due care and attention or “dangerous driving” comments:

Maybe they're paying attention to the bus up their ****, or the pedestrians wandering in the road near Museum Gardens, or the delivery lorries at Pizza Express, or avoiding the cyclists, or thinking "which one is Lendal Bridge" or asking themselves "What the Hell does restricted access mean? Does that mean me?"
I have noticed a few of the commenter’s are putting forward their opinion as to the standard of the drivers issued with a PCN for crossing the “Bridge” during the restricted times, comments such as “driving without due care and attention or “dangerous driving” and I was wondering if the commenter’s where bo-na fi-de police traffic officers, who are really the only competent people to assess a drivers errors and/or take the matter further. As Richard Catton put it re the “driving without due care and attention or “dangerous driving” comments: Maybe they're paying attention to the bus up their ****, or the pedestrians wandering in the road near Museum Gardens, or the delivery lorries at Pizza Express, or avoiding the cyclists, or thinking "which one is Lendal Bridge" or asking themselves "What the Hell does restricted access mean? Does that mean me?" Igiveinthen

12:09pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Jonthan says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
Some of of it is carelessness. But if you watch at the library, many cars turn round. Others hesitate, then decide to go for it knowing that they are not supposed to, and not realising the camera has spotted them.

Really there is not much excuse, but even if the bridge restrictions remain in force for ever, and flashing signs are introduced, there will still be some who will risk it, so York will still be dishing out penalty charges in 10 year from now.
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]Some of of it is carelessness. But if you watch at the library, many cars turn round. Others hesitate, then decide to go for it knowing that they are not supposed to, and not realising the camera has spotted them. Really there is not much excuse, but even if the bridge restrictions remain in force for ever, and flashing signs are introduced, there will still be some who will risk it, so York will still be dishing out penalty charges in 10 year from now. Jonthan

12:16pm Fri 17 Jan 14

CutterYork says...

Interesting run of comments.....

For what its worth here is a link to a blog I did analysing the councils published figures for month 3 of the trial.

http://www.beacon-do
dsworth.co.uk/blog/g
eneral-news/lendal-b
ridge-closure-halfwa
y-through-the-six-mo
nth-trial/

My concerns are that 70% of penalty charges that have been issued have gone to non YO postcodes.....
Interesting run of comments..... For what its worth here is a link to a blog I did analysing the councils published figures for month 3 of the trial. http://www.beacon-do dsworth.co.uk/blog/g eneral-news/lendal-b ridge-closure-halfwa y-through-the-six-mo nth-trial/ My concerns are that 70% of penalty charges that have been issued have gone to non YO postcodes..... CutterYork

3:04pm Fri 17 Jan 14

mutley12321 says...

Jonthan wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
Some of of it is carelessness. But if you watch at the library, many cars turn round. Others hesitate, then decide to go for it knowing that they are not supposed to, and not realising the camera has spotted them.

Really there is not much excuse, but even if the bridge restrictions remain in force for ever, and flashing signs are introduced, there will still be some who will risk it, so York will still be dishing out penalty charges in 10 year from now.
Hello Jonthan,

I agree that the principle of the idea has merit - although I would like to see what the initial critical success factors were published when the trial commenced?

Examples - Financial Gain in fines? Cost of implementation? Quicker/slower bus times? Enhanced air quality in the Lendal Bridge? Decreased air quality/ increased traffic elsewhere in the City? Resident/ Visitor perception?
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]Some of of it is carelessness. But if you watch at the library, many cars turn round. Others hesitate, then decide to go for it knowing that they are not supposed to, and not realising the camera has spotted them. Really there is not much excuse, but even if the bridge restrictions remain in force for ever, and flashing signs are introduced, there will still be some who will risk it, so York will still be dishing out penalty charges in 10 year from now.[/p][/quote]Hello Jonthan, I agree that the principle of the idea has merit - although I would like to see what the initial critical success factors were published when the trial commenced? Examples - Financial Gain in fines? Cost of implementation? Quicker/slower bus times? Enhanced air quality in the Lendal Bridge? Decreased air quality/ increased traffic elsewhere in the City? Resident/ Visitor perception? mutley12321

3:36pm Fri 17 Jan 14

the original Homer says...

CutterYork wrote:
Interesting run of comments..... For what its worth here is a link to a blog I did analysing the councils published figures for month 3 of the trial. http://www.beacon-do dsworth.co.uk/blog/g eneral-news/lendal-b ridge-closure-halfwa y-through-the-six-mo nth-trial/ My concerns are that 70% of penalty charges that have been issued have gone to non YO postcodes.....
..and the 30% which have York postcodes includes people from places such as Bridlington Scarborough and Whitby. They have YO postcodes, but they are visitors who won't know whcih bridge is which, and who may choose not to return.
[quote][p][bold]CutterYork[/bold] wrote: Interesting run of comments..... For what its worth here is a link to a blog I did analysing the councils published figures for month 3 of the trial. http://www.beacon-do dsworth.co.uk/blog/g eneral-news/lendal-b ridge-closure-halfwa y-through-the-six-mo nth-trial/ My concerns are that 70% of penalty charges that have been issued have gone to non YO postcodes.....[/p][/quote]..and the 30% which have York postcodes includes people from places such as Bridlington Scarborough and Whitby. They have YO postcodes, but they are visitors who won't know whcih bridge is which, and who may choose not to return. the original Homer

3:58pm Fri 17 Jan 14

chuckabuttie says...

What a bizarre thread. Not the subject matter which is worthy of debate whichever side of the fence you're on. The votes.... -986? + 282?

Weird. Some great, recently invented, user names too. I moved to the States several years ago and trust me even they would be embarrased by this and tbat takes some doing. Happy Days!
What a bizarre thread. Not the subject matter which is worthy of debate whichever side of the fence you're on. The votes.... -986? + 282? Weird. Some great, recently invented, user names too. I moved to the States several years ago and trust me even they would be embarrased by this and tbat takes some doing. Happy Days! chuckabuttie

4:24pm Fri 17 Jan 14

mmarshal says...

Dontfleecethetourist
s
wrote:
Caecilius wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.
No, a lot of them broke the rules quite deliberately, as a lot of motorists break other rules quite deliberately on a daily basis. They probably assumed that, as usual, they'ld just get away with it.

Keep the fines coming. Maybe the lesson will sink in.
totally disagree with that one.

Where is lendal bridge?

Oh I see. I'm a stranger in these parts but I'm expected to know.

Gee thanks mate. There's my £30. I won't be back.

Oh yes and while you are it, how about taking down the sign at the theatre , totally obscured by a bus and put it somewhere more meaningful.....like the traffic lights before you turn right for the bridge!!!!

People doing it deliberately.

Don't insult me!
I have attended several of the 'Have your say on Lendal Bridge' sessions and on each occasion have criticised the signage. In particular, mentioning the sign outside the Theatre which is obscured by buses most of the time (I recall that the BBC Look North report back in September showed the sign being obscured by a stationary bus.). On each occasion I was told that the problem had been noted and the sign would be moved to a more prominent position. Five months later and it still has not been moved.
I note also that on the approach to Clifton Green on the A19 the signs still direct traffic straight ahead for the rail station. The average driver can only take in so many signs. Surely, forty thousand drivers cannot all be ignoring clear signs. The signs are unclear and something needs to be done about them. As another correspondent mentions, the electronic sign on Station Avenue and Station Road states the Lendal Bridge is closed but the arrow actually directs motorists into the left hand lane. This must surely confuse anybody who doesn't know where Lendal Bridge is.
[quote][p][bold]Dontfleecethetourist s[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caecilius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: Still think the idea of closure is sound, but the way it has been handled has been poor. The fines surely back this up - 40k people cannot simply have been careless.[/p][/quote]No, a lot of them broke the rules quite deliberately, as a lot of motorists break other rules quite deliberately on a daily basis. They probably assumed that, as usual, they'ld just get away with it. Keep the fines coming. Maybe the lesson will sink in.[/p][/quote]totally disagree with that one. Where is lendal bridge? Oh I see. I'm a stranger in these parts but I'm expected to know. Gee thanks mate. There's my £30. I won't be back. Oh yes and while you are it, how about taking down the sign at the theatre , totally obscured by a bus and put it somewhere more meaningful.....like the traffic lights before you turn right for the bridge!!!! People doing it deliberately. Don't insult me![/p][/quote]I have attended several of the 'Have your say on Lendal Bridge' sessions and on each occasion have criticised the signage. In particular, mentioning the sign outside the Theatre which is obscured by buses most of the time (I recall that the BBC Look North report back in September showed the sign being obscured by a stationary bus.). On each occasion I was told that the problem had been noted and the sign would be moved to a more prominent position. Five months later and it still has not been moved. I note also that on the approach to Clifton Green on the A19 the signs still direct traffic straight ahead for the rail station. The average driver can only take in so many signs. Surely, forty thousand drivers cannot all be ignoring clear signs. The signs are unclear and something needs to be done about them. As another correspondent mentions, the electronic sign on Station Avenue and Station Road states the Lendal Bridge is closed but the arrow actually directs motorists into the left hand lane. This must surely confuse anybody who doesn't know where Lendal Bridge is. mmarshal

6:40pm Fri 17 Jan 14

RoseD says...

I will vote for ANYONE who will campaign to re-open the bridge. As one commentor (above) says, "The bridge was needed in horse and buggy days. Of course it's needed for cars!" (or somesuch).

I for one have been inconvenienced, left ill for 2 days at a go, and was forced to pay £64 to buy a new train ticket when I missed my train. If traffic was bad in the good ol days of an actual ring road being a RING, well, since I live in the Groves and the most direct driving route was also the most direct walking route, if all else failed I could leave the car and continue by foot (this happened maybe once in 8 yrs).

Now of course we are forced to drive AWAY from the station so, when it takes 30+ mins instead of 10 mins, I cant even get out and walk. The distance has become too great.

As someone who requests a 'priority' train seat, with extra legroom for a bag I will need access to during a 5 hr train journey, I am told to be at the station 20 mins before the train leave. Once I factor in the 40 min travel time I need to leave the house up to AN HOUR before my train.

Factor in that it can take 2 or even 3 hrs for me to be able to dress and leave the house. So to get a 10.30 train (once the bridge is closed at 7 am onward) I'll need to be up at 6.30 am. Thanks!! The other great part of MS is the insomnia.

This CYC is a joke and indeed are dangerous lunatics. I will vote for ANYONE who actively campaigns to re-open the bridge and thus restore the ring road to a RING.

'Scarlet Pimple'. LOVE it.
I will vote for ANYONE who will campaign to re-open the bridge. As one commentor (above) says, "The bridge was needed in horse and buggy days. Of course it's needed for cars!" (or somesuch). I for one have been inconvenienced, left ill for 2 days at a go, and was forced to pay £64 to buy a new train ticket when I missed my train. If traffic was bad in the good ol days of an actual ring road being a RING, well, since I live in the Groves and the most direct driving route was also the most direct walking route, if all else failed I could leave the car and continue by foot (this happened maybe once in 8 yrs). Now of course we are forced to drive AWAY from the station so, when it takes 30+ mins instead of 10 mins, I cant even get out and walk. The distance has become too great. As someone who requests a 'priority' train seat, with extra legroom for a bag I will need access to during a 5 hr train journey, I am told to be at the station 20 mins before the train leave. Once I factor in the 40 min travel time I need to leave the house up to AN HOUR before my train. Factor in that it can take 2 or even 3 hrs for me to be able to dress and leave the house. So to get a 10.30 train (once the bridge is closed at 7 am onward) I'll need to be up at 6.30 am. Thanks!! The other great part of MS is the insomnia. This CYC is a joke and indeed are dangerous lunatics. I will vote for ANYONE who actively campaigns to re-open the bridge and thus restore the ring road to a RING. 'Scarlet Pimple'. LOVE it. RoseD

6:42pm Fri 17 Jan 14

RoseD says...

Knavesmire view wrote:
In comparing December 2012 to December 2013 they are blaming Christmas traffic?

Yes because there has never been a Christmas until 2013 has there?

Seriously, their excuses get more and more desperate and rediculous!
Brilliant. Spot on.
[quote][p][bold]Knavesmire view[/bold] wrote: In comparing December 2012 to December 2013 they are blaming Christmas traffic? Yes because there has never been a Christmas until 2013 has there? Seriously, their excuses get more and more desperate and rediculous![/p][/quote]Brilliant. Spot on. RoseD

7:01pm Fri 17 Jan 14

LadyMoose says...

Apologies if this has already been asked/ answered!

Do we know what % of the 40,000 were from the theatre end, and how many from station end?
Apologies if this has already been asked/ answered! Do we know what % of the 40,000 were from the theatre end, and how many from station end? LadyMoose

10:55pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Phalanges says...

Despair … :-(
Despair … :-( Phalanges

10:12am Sat 18 Jan 14

sniper 9964 says...

40k careless and irresponsible car drivers. Thats scary !!!
40k careless and irresponsible car drivers. Thats scary !!! sniper 9964

11:39am Sat 18 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
40k careless and irresponsible car drivers. Thats scary !!!
Yes you had better take care when you cross the road without your mum and dad!
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: 40k careless and irresponsible car drivers. Thats scary !!![/p][/quote]Yes you had better take care when you cross the road without your mum and dad! Igiveinthen

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree