Bold move is just what York needs... then again...

York Press: . .

THE restriction of traffic on Lendal Bridge is a bold move by City of York Council.

There may be better ways to limit the motoring free-for-all that blights this city, but this restriction should be seen as an essential step toward freeing the whole city centre of the private motor car and the consequential concrete and Tarmac standing areas.

The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. Surely the city-centre shops and the tourist industry would benefit enormously by such a massively improved environment.

When Coney Street was closed to non-essential traffic, the same crazed car lobby prophesied catastrophe. Who trading in that street now would welcome back that sullen crawl of polluting metal? The end result of limiting car use will be improved bus services and better access for other forms of sustainable transport – with or without the help of central government.

Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington.

 

• FOLLOWING a recent visit to York, I subsequently received a penalty charge notice for a traffic contravention in respect of what I now know to be the Lendal Bridge bus lane.

As a frequent visitor to the city, I was somewhat bemused by this, as I had used this route on many previous occasions.

However, I have since discovered I am not alone in this regard.

Following a Freedom of Information Request, I am informed that fines amounting to £524,160 have been issued in the first 68 days of operation of this restriction. At that rate the Council stands to make £2.8million per annum from this single traffic scheme.

I wonder if anyone local shares the sentiment that this appears to be excessive. It is after all a perfectly good road bridge.

Stephen Tingley, Winton Road, Ware, Herts.

 

• ON BBC Radio York, Coun Dave Merrett said he had wanted to send out warning letters for first time offenders crossing Lendal Bridge, but was told by the DVLA it wasn’t allowed, so everybody got a fine.

So who decided not to send out fines to the people who drove over the bridge the first week? What’s the truth? Why weren’t the people who drove down Coppergate in the first week let off?

There were no signs the week before at Coppergate saying the times were changing. Why not? Was it a ploy to collect money from car drivers?

Stephen Mortimer, Cosmo Avenue, Heworth, York.

 

• HAVING resisted the temptation to write about Lendal Bridge for so long, I now feel compelled to have my say.

First of all, one has to determine what constitutes the city centre. Ouse Bridge is the middle bridge of the original three, so I would have thought that this was the central route into the city centre and the traffic restrictions that existed in Blake Street, Davygate, Parliament Street, Coney Street and Coppergate before the closure kept traffic out of the city centre anyway.

Most of the traffic over Lendal Bridge went down Bootham or Gillygate, away from the city centre. So was there an ulterior motive in keeping the area traffic free possibly making it quieter for any new hotel in the old council offices?

A statement in The Press of November 27 from a council spokesperson said that the closure will “improve bus times, cut pollution and city-centre traffic”. Yet bus times have not improved and all this closure has done is to move the congestion and pollution to other places, in particular more populated areas such as Clifton Green. This has also led to more traffic using Westminster Road and The Avenue. No doubt the residents of these streets will congratulate their local councillor for supporting the closure.

AP Cox, Heath Close, Holgate, York

 

.• THIS letter is not a complaint about the York council or any councillors, it is just a letter about a plaque on Lendal Bridge, that says this bridge was declared free from toll on the day of August 7,1894. So why is there one now, for are not fines some kind of toll?

Maybe one day the powers that be will let history stay the way it was written.

Frank Cartin, Guardian Court, Water Lane, York.

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:05pm Tue 3 Dec 13

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington.
The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers.

And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep".

The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.
Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington. The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep". The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas. YOUWILLDOASISAY

1:29pm Tue 3 Dec 13

Fair t' Middlin says...

We need large areas of parkland in the city centre so that all the children who currently reside in the council offices have somewhere else to play.
We need large areas of parkland in the city centre so that all the children who currently reside in the council offices have somewhere else to play. Fair t' Middlin

6:26pm Tue 3 Dec 13

ColdAsChristmas says...

Having looked at the last few First York time tables, the frequency of busses or times between stops on the No 1 bus, these do not appear to have changed. Does this mean that busses are stationary at stops for longer?
(With engine running in cold weather of course)

It's a scam. Just stop this trial and stop messing the public about Merrett !
Having looked at the last few First York time tables, the frequency of busses or times between stops on the No 1 bus, these do not appear to have changed. Does this mean that busses are stationary at stops for longer? (With engine running in cold weather of course) It's a scam. Just stop this trial and stop messing the public about Merrett ! ColdAsChristmas

1:51am Wed 4 Dec 13

Magicman! says...

A comment by AP Cox mentioning Westminster Road made me have a thought: weren't they the same people piggybacking on the "remove that cycle lane" brigade in the hope they'd get a shiny bollard in the middle of their road and it would be free of all cars. And though the cycle lane has gone, there's now more traffic on Water End and Westminster Road than when the cycle lane WAS in place.... so perhaps the council are giving them a big middle finger... or maybe it's a subliminal message that removing a cycle lane is not some magical silver bullet that makes all the traffic suddenly dissappear.


Roger Westmoreland makes a comment: "The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. Surely the city-centre shops and the tourist industry would benefit enormously by such a massively improved environment. "
... well in 1948 the council did have a plan that would have created this sort of outcome.... a new inner ring road was planned to go beside the scarborough rail line in the grounds of Bootham Park, then across to a new road running parallel to Lord Mayors Walk (now Penleys Grove Street) to the current roundabout at Huntington Road/Monkgate, then straight over the Foss to a junction with what is now James Street and following the exact same course as James Street does now, but then going straight across Lawrence Street at another jumction, then a junction with Heslington Road, then to a junction with Fishergate roughly where Mecca Bingo is situated (Blue Bridge Lane) before going over the river on a new bridge and to a junction with Bishopthorpe Road, then a new road running parallel to but in between Scarcroft Road and Nunnery Lane to a junction at The Mount (with the A59) whereby Blossom Street would go just to Micklegate Bar and Nunnery Lane but no other roads, whilst the new road would go diagonal straight to the grounds of the rail station and then straight up over the river on a new bridge to the Bootham Park junction... all the roads were marked as 'broadways' which would either be roads of a single lane or two lanes in each direction but seperated by a grassed central reservation - and each junction was either a big roundabout or an ovalabout (no unituitive traffic lights here!) which would be grassed in the middle. And what of the space between this proposed new road and the city walls? well the plan was for that to be an inner-city green belt, an unbroken ribbon of green space like Harrogate Stray. And whilst each junction had connections to the traditional entrances to the city (and the next roads 'in' so to speak), there would have been far less traffic in the city itself because it would all be going around this fit-for-purpose orbital road.
... but it never got built. Instead the council of the time went for the CHEAPER option of using existing roads and just labelling those as the 'inner ring road' (these existing roads being the next set of roads in from the new road that, if you squint at the map, look like they might form some sort of loop). They even built Foss Bank as curving around beside the river foss so that it could share the same bridge as St Maurices Road because they didn't want to build another bridge!
And now we in York are suffering because of that councils' poor planning decision based purely on money and not on future-proofing the city.
A comment by AP Cox mentioning Westminster Road made me have a thought: weren't they the same people piggybacking on the "remove that cycle lane" brigade in the hope they'd get a shiny bollard in the middle of their road and it would be free of all cars. And though the cycle lane has gone, there's now more traffic on Water End and Westminster Road than when the cycle lane WAS in place.... so perhaps the council are giving them a big middle finger... or maybe it's a subliminal message that removing a cycle lane is not some magical silver bullet that makes all the traffic suddenly dissappear. Roger Westmoreland makes a comment: "The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. Surely the city-centre shops and the tourist industry would benefit enormously by such a massively improved environment. " ... well in 1948 the council did have a plan that would have created this sort of outcome.... a new inner ring road was planned to go beside the scarborough rail line in the grounds of Bootham Park, then across to a new road running parallel to Lord Mayors Walk (now Penleys Grove Street) to the current roundabout at Huntington Road/Monkgate, then straight over the Foss to a junction with what is now James Street and following the exact same course as James Street does now, but then going straight across Lawrence Street at another jumction, then a junction with Heslington Road, then to a junction with Fishergate roughly where Mecca Bingo is situated (Blue Bridge Lane) before going over the river on a new bridge and to a junction with Bishopthorpe Road, then a new road running parallel to but in between Scarcroft Road and Nunnery Lane to a junction at The Mount (with the A59) whereby Blossom Street would go just to Micklegate Bar and Nunnery Lane but no other roads, whilst the new road would go diagonal straight to the grounds of the rail station and then straight up over the river on a new bridge to the Bootham Park junction... all the roads were marked as 'broadways' which would either be roads of a single lane or two lanes in each direction but seperated by a grassed central reservation - and each junction was either a big roundabout or an ovalabout (no unituitive traffic lights here!) which would be grassed in the middle. And what of the space between this proposed new road and the city walls? well the plan was for that to be an inner-city green belt, an unbroken ribbon of green space like Harrogate Stray. And whilst each junction had connections to the traditional entrances to the city (and the next roads 'in' so to speak), there would have been far less traffic in the city itself because it would all be going around this fit-for-purpose orbital road. ... but it never got built. Instead the council of the time went for the CHEAPER option of using existing roads and just labelling those as the 'inner ring road' (these existing roads being the next set of roads in from the new road that, if you squint at the map, look like they might form some sort of loop). They even built Foss Bank as curving around beside the river foss so that it could share the same bridge as St Maurices Road because they didn't want to build another bridge! And now we in York are suffering because of that councils' poor planning decision based purely on money and not on future-proofing the city. Magicman!

11:23am Wed 4 Dec 13

Jonthan says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington.
The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers.

And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep".

The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.
Any evidence for that last assertion?

I live in a residential area and I am iin the city centre almost daily and I see no increase in traffic since the bridge restrictions.
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington. The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep". The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.[/p][/quote]Any evidence for that last assertion? I live in a residential area and I am iin the city centre almost daily and I see no increase in traffic since the bridge restrictions. Jonthan

1:14pm Wed 4 Dec 13

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Jonthan wrote:
YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington.
The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers.

And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep".

The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.
Any evidence for that last assertion?

I live in a residential area and I am iin the city centre almost daily and I see no increase in traffic since the bridge restrictions.
Yes.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington. The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep". The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.[/p][/quote]Any evidence for that last assertion? I live in a residential area and I am iin the city centre almost daily and I see no increase in traffic since the bridge restrictions.[/p][/quote]Yes. YOUWILLDOASISAY

9:27pm Wed 4 Dec 13

AnotherPointofView says...

Jonthan wrote:
YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote: Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington. The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep". The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.
Any evidence for that last assertion? I live in a residential area and I am iin the city centre almost daily and I see no increase in traffic since the bridge restrictions.
As a Labour stooge, you don't see the increase in traffic because you don't want to. Try opening your eyes as you walk around town.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: Roger Westmoreland, The Oval, Pocklington. The city centre could be transformed by a hundred acres of new parkland, with grass, trees and flowers. And all the little pixies went "Neep, Neep, Neep". The bridge needs to be open to reduce congestion and emissions now occurring in residential areas.[/p][/quote]Any evidence for that last assertion? I live in a residential area and I am iin the city centre almost daily and I see no increase in traffic since the bridge restrictions.[/p][/quote]As a Labour stooge, you don't see the increase in traffic because you don't want to. Try opening your eyes as you walk around town. AnotherPointofView

9:17pm Sun 8 Dec 13

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

My, oh my someone has been busy marking all the postings down.

It doesn't change the content though.

How sad.
My, oh my someone has been busy marking all the postings down. It doesn't change the content though. How sad. YOUWILLDOASISAY

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