City council has got its priorities wrong

Buses on Lendal Bridge during the trial closure to cars

Buses on Lendal Bridge during the trial closure to cars

First published in Letters by

First, congratulations on your front page scoop (Lendal Bridge – the secret files, February 27). A great piece of effective journalism.

A council spokeswoman states that the trial closure was not to generate revenue, but as part of a long-term vision to create an even more attractive thriving city for everyone.

If that was the case, and money wasn’t the motive for closing the bridge, why did not the council just install signs saying that the bridge had restricted use?

Instituting fines has generated a massive amount of animosity from visitors to York. With York council’s collective mindset it is not surprising that Richard Littlejohn in the Daily Mail has been poking fun at some of its latest “achievements”, one of which is to provide self-esteem courses for habitual drunkards.

Meanwhile, in Bishopthorpe, the council is refusing to pay for a lollipop lady near a school, on the grounds that the road is “too dangerous”.

It has also purchased a spy car to monitor parents and fine them if they dare to park for a few seconds when dropping off their children. York councillors certainly get their priorities right. Remember that please when election times come around.

Linda Sheridan, Larchfield, Stockton Lane, York.

 

• I wonder if many people saw the BBC TV Look North last Thursday when Coun Dave Merrett was interviewed by Harry Gration? Harry said his answer was rubbish but Coun Merrett still insisted that closing Lendal Bridge caused an average delay of four minutes.

I don’t know where the calculation was done but if four is an average what numbers are the maximum and minimum? There is a majority against the closure but Coun Merrett has his agenda and he will have his way and ignore the people. He is not working for the people as he claims but for his own ends.

He is lucky he is in a safe seat or he’d be sent packing. A comment on the soldiers in the First World War was “lions led by donkeys” – it says it all about our councillors.

Tony Skaife, Highcliffe Court, York.

 

• The continued restrictions on Lendal Bridge after the end of the supposed trial period, together with revelations in secret emails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, make it clear that Labour have already decided this asset will remain closed come hell or high water.

The only way the bridge can be returned to its intended function as a river crossing for the benefit of all York citizens is by a change of political control at the ballot box.

I will vote for the candidate that commits to at least investigating the possibility of sweeping away unnecessary blockages, restrictions and traffic lights in order to get vehicles flowing freely through the city. The way to deal with congestion is to get vehicles moving as quickly and easily as possible to where they need to go – not to invent more and more obstacles in the hope that the traffic will all go away. It won’t.

Matthew Laverack, Lord Mayors’ Walk, York.

 

• Having read all the letters and talked to a lot of people about Lendal Bridge I have come to some conclusions.

Of all the people I have spoken to who are not happy with the closure not one when asked can provide an alternative to our traffic problems. Whatever is done to solve the problem is going to please some and displease others. At least this council is trying to do something.

As for the people who contest the fines bleating about the warning signs, that to me is an indication that they don’t look out for any signs. Other cities have the same system and drivers from York have been fined. The signs are adequate as proved by drivers I have seen turning round.

It is disgraceful that people are let off by people who do not care about our great city.

While I am not for or against this experiment, I do appreciate that the council is trying and even if I do not in the future agree with what it does I wish it well as I believe it has a nearly impossible task.

Barry Hamer, Thief Lane, York.

 

• A reader has asked me how I can square an argument for restricting car use in the city centre with the substantial income the city derives from car parking. You can park your car in almost any York car park, including Park&Ride, without impinging on the city centre.

We need to think bigger than this. I have heard many well thought-out arguments for curbing car use in York’s city centre, involving the realities of the worsening traffic problem, especially given the rapid growth in population. This sense of vision (shared by national government and comparable cities across Europe) has not been matched by those of a reactionary mindset who have been challenged time and time again to give us their own coherent vision of how we can have a city with living streets, a city which is pleasant to live in for everyone, with equal access to save travel space. The silence is deafening.

Please can they present their alternative traffic management policy so that we can understand how it is any different from the ostrich with its head in the sand?

Jim McGurn, Chief executive, Get Cycling, Hospitals Fields Road, Fulford, York

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:23pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Stevie D says...

@Linda Sheridan:
If that was the case, and money wasn’t the motive for closing the bridge, why did not the council just install signs saying that the bridge had restricted use?

Blindingly obvious answer: because selfish drivers wouldn't have paid a blind bit of attention to it, so it would have had no effect at all. You only had to see the number of drivers using Coppergate illegally before the cameras came in, and the number of drivers who ignore the "no right turn" onto Spurriergate, to realise how many drivers will deliberately ignore restrictions, not to mention the thousands of others who would have carried on doing it blissfully unaware they had done anything wrong if there as no enforcement.

Unfortunately drivers who ignore the rules are their own worst enemy, because when flouting the law becomes widespread, you end up with heavy-handed enforcement like here.
@Linda Sheridan: [quote]If that was the case, and money wasn’t the motive for closing the bridge, why did not the council just install signs saying that the bridge had restricted use?[/quote] Blindingly obvious answer: because selfish drivers wouldn't have paid a blind bit of attention to it, so it would have had no effect at all. You only had to see the number of drivers using Coppergate illegally before the cameras came in, and the number of drivers who ignore the "no right turn" onto Spurriergate, to realise how many drivers will [italic]deliberately[/italic] ignore restrictions, not to mention the thousands of others who would have carried on doing it blissfully unaware they had done anything wrong if there as no enforcement. Unfortunately drivers who ignore the rules are their own worst enemy, because when flouting the law becomes widespread, you end up with heavy-handed enforcement like here. Stevie D
  • Score: 28

12:38pm Tue 4 Mar 14

The Great Buda says...

Fancy writting in and admitting you read the Daily Mail.
Fancy writting in and admitting you read the Daily Mail. The Great Buda
  • Score: 22

1:01pm Tue 4 Mar 14

CaroleBaines says...

The Great Buda wrote:
Fancy writting in and admitting you read the Daily Mail.
A person who reads the Daily Mail and can write?! :)
[quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: Fancy writting in and admitting you read the Daily Mail.[/p][/quote]A person who reads the Daily Mail and can write?! :) CaroleBaines
  • Score: 21

1:43pm Tue 4 Mar 14

wildthing666 says...

So what of the £1 million pounds + that they generated in fines for just 6 months £2 million per year if it continues and the scam as not been scrapped while they consult over it. IMO this is clear that a group such as common purpose are behind the closure as a way of generating income the council will siphon off in corrupt pockets
So what of the £1 million pounds + that they generated in fines for just 6 months £2 million per year if it continues and the scam as not been scrapped while they consult over it. IMO this is clear that a group such as common purpose are behind the closure as a way of generating income the council will siphon off in corrupt pockets wildthing666
  • Score: -7

1:43pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Jonthan says...

It's bad enough that it is the Mail, but she is quoting Richard Littlehohn.
It's bad enough that it is the Mail, but she is quoting Richard Littlehohn. Jonthan
  • Score: 22

2:05pm Tue 4 Mar 14

strangebuttrue? says...

In response to Jim McGurn's letter:

At risk of repeating myself again I did present a proposal last time Jim McGurn attacked 80% of York citizens in one of your letters. That deafening silence you hear Jim is due to your not listening or reading but that is what we have come to expect from proponents of the bridge closure.
I have pasted my last suggestion below: -

Here is an alternative for you Jim. The council say volume of traffic in York is now less than it was in 2002 and since 2006 pollution has risen by up to 48%. Now correct me if I am wrong but was it not about 2006 that the council started with all this "nudging" (bullying) or as Mr Merrett put it yesterday "constraining". Now putting 2 and 2 together I would suggest we look at all of the anti car schemes put in since 2006 and take them out again, Lendal Bridge included. We did not need them to reduce the volume of traffic between 2002 and 2006 when traffic volumes decreased so why do we need them now?

Further to this Jim let help you with an example of how removing the anti car measures can help all: -

Last year the lights at the end of Carr Lane/York Road failed for about 4 days. The result - no queues, in fact hardly any traffic to be seen. Acomb shopping centre looked like a ghost town for most of the time and even at peak times only a few vehicles were queuing. I did not see any pedestrians or cyclist having to wait as there were no cars to impede them. Acomb shopping centre was a lot pleasanter place to be as the occasional vehicle passed through uninhibited. Unfortunately this was not to last and the lights were fixed and the queues returned along with all of the pedestrians waiting for a green man. This sort of result is seen every time a set of lights fail in York.

On the radio a couple of times recently people have rung in during the morning peak time excitedly telling us that traffic lights have failed as if this is some big disaster. When asked by the presenter what the traffic was like at the time they have looked up and stumblingly commented - well there isn't any - but it could get bad later. Later when? Mid morning maybe?
In response to Jim McGurn's letter: At risk of repeating myself again I did present a proposal last time Jim McGurn attacked 80% of York citizens in one of your letters. That deafening silence you hear Jim is due to your not listening or reading but that is what we have come to expect from proponents of the bridge closure. I have pasted my last suggestion below: - Here is an alternative for you Jim. The council say volume of traffic in York is now less than it was in 2002 and since 2006 pollution has risen by up to 48%. Now correct me if I am wrong but was it not about 2006 that the council started with all this "nudging" (bullying) or as Mr Merrett put it yesterday "constraining". Now putting 2 and 2 together I would suggest we look at all of the anti car schemes put in since 2006 and take them out again, Lendal Bridge included. We did not need them to reduce the volume of traffic between 2002 and 2006 when traffic volumes decreased so why do we need them now? Further to this Jim let help you with an example of how removing the anti car measures can help all: - Last year the lights at the end of Carr Lane/York Road failed for about 4 days. The result - no queues, in fact hardly any traffic to be seen. Acomb shopping centre looked like a ghost town for most of the time and even at peak times only a few vehicles were queuing. I did not see any pedestrians or cyclist having to wait as there were no cars to impede them. Acomb shopping centre was a lot pleasanter place to be as the occasional vehicle passed through uninhibited. Unfortunately this was not to last and the lights were fixed and the queues returned along with all of the pedestrians waiting for a green man. This sort of result is seen every time a set of lights fail in York. On the radio a couple of times recently people have rung in during the morning peak time excitedly telling us that traffic lights have failed as if this is some big disaster. When asked by the presenter what the traffic was like at the time they have looked up and stumblingly commented - well there isn't any - but it could get bad later. Later when? Mid morning maybe? strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -1

3:27pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Dr Robert says...

With reference to the above, strangebuttrue , I can confirm that the streets are virtually empty come 1000hrs, that is Fulford Road, Fishergate, Foss Islands, Clifford Street, Micklegate, Walmgate, Layerthorpe, Blossom street, then slightly more busy around the Station, mainly buses, taxis, Labours congestion is a myth, but slowing everything down i.e. road closures, chicanes like Heslington, 20mph signs in cul-de-sac's and bridge closures is down to this council. GET RID.
With reference to the above, strangebuttrue , I can confirm that the streets are virtually empty come 1000hrs, that is Fulford Road, Fishergate, Foss Islands, Clifford Street, Micklegate, Walmgate, Layerthorpe, Blossom street, then slightly more busy around the Station, mainly buses, taxis, Labours congestion is a myth, but slowing everything down i.e. road closures, chicanes like Heslington, 20mph signs in cul-de-sac's and bridge closures is down to this council. GET RID. Dr Robert
  • Score: 1

3:33pm Tue 4 Mar 14

meme says...

the writer who says that when lights fail traffic moves faster is 100% correct
when the failed at corner of Blossom St/Scarcroft road the queues vanished immediately.
Perhaps a controlled experiment would prove this is correct
the writer who says that when lights fail traffic moves faster is 100% correct when the failed at corner of Blossom St/Scarcroft road the queues vanished immediately. Perhaps a controlled experiment would prove this is correct meme
  • Score: 1

4:32pm Tue 4 Mar 14

bravo whisky says...

Reference meme, the easy flow of traffic when traffic lights are out of action has been brought up many times, the council line is , traffic lights are there for pedestrians, so they can cross easily.
Reference meme, the easy flow of traffic when traffic lights are out of action has been brought up many times, the council line is , traffic lights are there for pedestrians, so they can cross easily. bravo whisky
  • Score: -2

4:49pm Tue 4 Mar 14

MarkyMarkMark says...

So, here's a proposal. Let's have a day of "no local traffic restrictions" - turn all the traffic lights within the outer ring road off, and lift all "partial" restrictions. so the cars and car owners can go wherever.
However, enforce parking restrictions as they should be (i.e. more vigorously than normal) and ticket anyone who overstays, parks unlawfully (including on footpaths & pavements), and even more so enforce speed limits.

Then follow it a few days later with a complete "no privately owned motorised traffic" day too.

How do you measure success? Absolutely no idea - number of RTCs, tickets issued, air quality (don't think 24 hrs would make a difference), agreed standard journey timings?

But it'd be fun.
So, here's a proposal. Let's have a day of "no local traffic restrictions" - turn all the traffic lights within the outer ring road off, and lift all "partial" restrictions. so the cars and car owners can go wherever. However, enforce parking restrictions as they should be (i.e. more vigorously than normal) and ticket anyone who overstays, parks unlawfully (including on footpaths & pavements), and even more so enforce speed limits. Then follow it a few days later with a complete "no privately owned motorised traffic" day too. How do you measure success? Absolutely no idea - number of RTCs, tickets issued, air quality (don't think 24 hrs would make a difference), agreed standard journey timings? But it'd be fun. MarkyMarkMark
  • Score: 9

5:46pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Badgers Drift says...

bravo whisky wrote:
Reference meme, the easy flow of traffic when traffic lights are out of action has been brought up many times, the council line is , traffic lights are there for pedestrians, so they can cross easily.
The council use the traffic light timings to cause maximum disruption and delay to car drivers. It's an obvious tactic to deter cars from coming into the city. Sadly it also increases emissions/polution, and costs to residents and businesses.

It's time that the Labour (communist) regime was kicked out for good, and officers put in their place by councillors who work for York and it's residents !
[quote][p][bold]bravo whisky[/bold] wrote: Reference meme, the easy flow of traffic when traffic lights are out of action has been brought up many times, the council line is , traffic lights are there for pedestrians, so they can cross easily.[/p][/quote]The council use the traffic light timings to cause maximum disruption and delay to car drivers. It's an obvious tactic to deter cars from coming into the city. Sadly it also increases emissions/polution, and costs to residents and businesses. It's time that the Labour (communist) regime was kicked out for good, and officers put in their place by councillors who work for York and it's residents ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -18

7:57pm Tue 4 Mar 14

bolero says...

14TH April draws ever closer. We will have the type of shops we have always wanted but which City of York denied us. Looking forward to the opening of the Vangarde development at Monks Cross, the need to go into York decreases even further. Goodbye York. The end is nigh. Prepare to meet thy doom. Self inflicted.
14TH April draws ever closer. We will have the type of shops we have always wanted but which City of York denied us. Looking forward to the opening of the Vangarde development at Monks Cross, the need to go into York decreases even further. Goodbye York. The end is nigh. Prepare to meet thy doom. Self inflicted. bolero
  • Score: -13

12:36am Wed 5 Mar 14

strangebuttrue? says...

bolero wrote:
14TH April draws ever closer. We will have the type of shops we have always wanted but which City of York denied us. Looking forward to the opening of the Vangarde development at Monks Cross, the need to go into York decreases even further. Goodbye York. The end is nigh. Prepare to meet thy doom. Self inflicted.
Only shame is the council seem to have managed to get a set of lights up there Jockey Lane/Kathryn Avenue. No doubt with money extorted from the developers as part of the planning permission process.

When I went up the other day, not particularly busy traffic wise, there were queues leading up to the roundabout and I could not get across off the road round the back of Asda. When I finally did, with a lot of cooperation from those in the queue, and approached the roundabout it was clear to see why. The lights were only letting 4 or 5 cars at a time through, Standard practice for our congestion creating council. Result - Queue up Jockey Lane, queues up Monks Cross Drive, Queues all round the roundabout and every road leading to it. For traffic trying to get on the roundabout this led to them having to carefully negotiate their way through small gaps were they could not see if traffic was coming round on the inner lane and hence a great deal of danger. I fear the spread of the councils congestion creation tactic to these outer shopping areas is inevitable. I think they class the centre of York as anywhere within 5 miles of the outer boundary.
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: 14TH April draws ever closer. We will have the type of shops we have always wanted but which City of York denied us. Looking forward to the opening of the Vangarde development at Monks Cross, the need to go into York decreases even further. Goodbye York. The end is nigh. Prepare to meet thy doom. Self inflicted.[/p][/quote]Only shame is the council seem to have managed to get a set of lights up there Jockey Lane/Kathryn Avenue. No doubt with money extorted from the developers as part of the planning permission process. When I went up the other day, not particularly busy traffic wise, there were queues leading up to the roundabout and I could not get across off the road round the back of Asda. When I finally did, with a lot of cooperation from those in the queue, and approached the roundabout it was clear to see why. The lights were only letting 4 or 5 cars at a time through, Standard practice for our congestion creating council. Result - Queue up Jockey Lane, queues up Monks Cross Drive, Queues all round the roundabout and every road leading to it. For traffic trying to get on the roundabout this led to them having to carefully negotiate their way through small gaps were they could not see if traffic was coming round on the inner lane and hence a great deal of danger. I fear the spread of the councils congestion creation tactic to these outer shopping areas is inevitable. I think they class the centre of York as anywhere within 5 miles of the outer boundary. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 4

4:58am Wed 5 Mar 14

Magicman! says...

Stevie D wrote:
@Linda Sheridan:
If that was the case, and money wasn’t the motive for closing the bridge, why did not the council just install signs saying that the bridge had restricted use?

Blindingly obvious answer: because selfish drivers wouldn't have paid a blind bit of attention to it, so it would have had no effect at all. You only had to see the number of drivers using Coppergate illegally before the cameras came in, and the number of drivers who ignore the "no right turn" onto Spurriergate, to realise how many drivers will deliberately ignore restrictions, not to mention the thousands of others who would have carried on doing it blissfully unaware they had done anything wrong if there as no enforcement.

Unfortunately drivers who ignore the rules are their own worst enemy, because when flouting the law becomes widespread, you end up with heavy-handed enforcement like here.
Spot on. And as soon as cameras went up in Coppergate, suddenly out comes the whining brigade all complaining because they can't break the law any more for free.
[quote][p][bold]Stevie D[/bold] wrote: @Linda Sheridan: [quote]If that was the case, and money wasn’t the motive for closing the bridge, why did not the council just install signs saying that the bridge had restricted use?[/quote] Blindingly obvious answer: because selfish drivers wouldn't have paid a blind bit of attention to it, so it would have had no effect at all. You only had to see the number of drivers using Coppergate illegally before the cameras came in, and the number of drivers who ignore the "no right turn" onto Spurriergate, to realise how many drivers will [italic]deliberately[/italic] ignore restrictions, not to mention the thousands of others who would have carried on doing it blissfully unaware they had done anything wrong if there as no enforcement. Unfortunately drivers who ignore the rules are their own worst enemy, because when flouting the law becomes widespread, you end up with heavy-handed enforcement like here.[/p][/quote]Spot on. And as soon as cameras went up in Coppergate, suddenly out comes the whining brigade all complaining because they can't break the law any more for free. Magicman!
  • Score: -2

4:58am Wed 5 Mar 14

Magicman! says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
Fancy writting in and admitting you read the Daily Mail.
A person who reads the Daily Mail and can write?! :)
You know the old saying about monkeys and typewriters....
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: Fancy writting in and admitting you read the Daily Mail.[/p][/quote]A person who reads the Daily Mail and can write?! :)[/p][/quote]You know the old saying about monkeys and typewriters.... Magicman!
  • Score: -3

5:08am Wed 5 Mar 14

Magicman! says...

meme wrote:
the writer who says that when lights fail traffic moves faster is 100% correct
when the failed at corner of Blossom St/Scarcroft road the queues vanished immediately.
Perhaps a controlled experiment would prove this is correct
Blackpool council have been doing this at two junctions along the promenade... they started it about a year ago now, and considering the main road there is usually back to back with cars in the peak season it would be interesting how the result of that trial pans out. I personally think in York outside of peak hours, and especially between midnight at 5am, there are junctions where the lights can be shut off. My idea for if the corner of St lenoards Place and Duncombe Place were to be rebuilt, would be to buy the corner of land from the crescent offices that the council used to occupy so a walkway can be built there - this would then mean buses would not have to swing out so far when turning from Museum Street, and would traffic could then go round the corner in both directions at the same time; this would mean the traffic lights could be removed entirely (duncombe place and blake street becoming a tertiary arm of the junction with access going over the paved area as per the council's drawings) - and pedestrians would be catered for by means of raised zebra crossings placed a bus length back from the radius of the corner itself. Somebody also mentioned Heslington, I still cannot understand the mindset of whoever designed the road-narrowing junction at Field Lane and Windmill Lane.

My opinion is that traffic needs to flow around the outside of the city so that it does not have to come into the core of the city centre where all the tourists are.
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: the writer who says that when lights fail traffic moves faster is 100% correct when the failed at corner of Blossom St/Scarcroft road the queues vanished immediately. Perhaps a controlled experiment would prove this is correct[/p][/quote]Blackpool council have been doing this at two junctions along the promenade... they started it about a year ago now, and considering the main road there is usually back to back with cars in the peak season it would be interesting how the result of that trial pans out. I personally think in York outside of peak hours, and especially between midnight at 5am, there are junctions where the lights can be shut off. My idea for if the corner of St lenoards Place and Duncombe Place were to be rebuilt, would be to buy the corner of land from the crescent offices that the council used to occupy so a walkway can be built there - this would then mean buses would not have to swing out so far when turning from Museum Street, and would traffic could then go round the corner in both directions at the same time; this would mean the traffic lights could be removed entirely (duncombe place and blake street becoming a tertiary arm of the junction with access going over the paved area as per the council's drawings) - and pedestrians would be catered for by means of raised zebra crossings placed a bus length back from the radius of the corner itself. Somebody also mentioned Heslington, I still cannot understand the mindset of whoever designed the road-narrowing junction at Field Lane and Windmill Lane. My opinion is that traffic needs to flow around the outside of the city so that it does not have to come into the core of the city centre where all the tourists are. Magicman!
  • Score: -4

5:14am Wed 5 Mar 14

Magicman! says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
bolero wrote:
14TH April draws ever closer. We will have the type of shops we have always wanted but which City of York denied us. Looking forward to the opening of the Vangarde development at Monks Cross, the need to go into York decreases even further. Goodbye York. The end is nigh. Prepare to meet thy doom. Self inflicted.
Only shame is the council seem to have managed to get a set of lights up there Jockey Lane/Kathryn Avenue. No doubt with money extorted from the developers as part of the planning permission process.

When I went up the other day, not particularly busy traffic wise, there were queues leading up to the roundabout and I could not get across off the road round the back of Asda. When I finally did, with a lot of cooperation from those in the queue, and approached the roundabout it was clear to see why. The lights were only letting 4 or 5 cars at a time through, Standard practice for our congestion creating council. Result - Queue up Jockey Lane, queues up Monks Cross Drive, Queues all round the roundabout and every road leading to it. For traffic trying to get on the roundabout this led to them having to carefully negotiate their way through small gaps were they could not see if traffic was coming round on the inner lane and hence a great deal of danger. I fear the spread of the councils congestion creation tactic to these outer shopping areas is inevitable. I think they class the centre of York as anywhere within 5 miles of the outer boundary.
The lights must have gone to a failsafe setting due to a failure in the circuits. I live right near here and so go through those lights several times a week... and coming from Katryn Avenue I can be waiting for 2-3 minutes before Jockey Lane is given a red light.

I think a more important issue at the moment up there is the lack of any pedestrian crossing facilities from Evans Cycles / Rodgers Carpets area across to Asda... the contractors are replacing the old crossing point with a new one controlled by traffic lights - they have taken out the dropped kerbs and pathway on the Asda side of the old crossing point, but have not built the path on the Rodgers side of the new crossing point; so now we have gone from a crossing point which was OK, to having 2 crossing point but neither can be used. Perhaps somebody with a wheelchair can go up there and take some photos with them looking a bit annoyed and then send the photos into the Press so that a DDA-based case can be brought against whoever made this stupid decision.
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: 14TH April draws ever closer. We will have the type of shops we have always wanted but which City of York denied us. Looking forward to the opening of the Vangarde development at Monks Cross, the need to go into York decreases even further. Goodbye York. The end is nigh. Prepare to meet thy doom. Self inflicted.[/p][/quote]Only shame is the council seem to have managed to get a set of lights up there Jockey Lane/Kathryn Avenue. No doubt with money extorted from the developers as part of the planning permission process. When I went up the other day, not particularly busy traffic wise, there were queues leading up to the roundabout and I could not get across off the road round the back of Asda. When I finally did, with a lot of cooperation from those in the queue, and approached the roundabout it was clear to see why. The lights were only letting 4 or 5 cars at a time through, Standard practice for our congestion creating council. Result - Queue up Jockey Lane, queues up Monks Cross Drive, Queues all round the roundabout and every road leading to it. For traffic trying to get on the roundabout this led to them having to carefully negotiate their way through small gaps were they could not see if traffic was coming round on the inner lane and hence a great deal of danger. I fear the spread of the councils congestion creation tactic to these outer shopping areas is inevitable. I think they class the centre of York as anywhere within 5 miles of the outer boundary.[/p][/quote]The lights must have gone to a failsafe setting due to a failure in the circuits. I live right near here and so go through those lights several times a week... and coming from Katryn Avenue I can be waiting for 2-3 minutes before Jockey Lane is given a red light. I think a more important issue at the moment up there is the lack of any pedestrian crossing facilities from Evans Cycles / Rodgers Carpets area across to Asda... the contractors are replacing the old crossing point with a new one controlled by traffic lights - they have taken out the dropped kerbs and pathway on the Asda side of the old crossing point, but have not built the path on the Rodgers side of the new crossing point; so now we have gone from a crossing point which was OK, to having 2 crossing point but neither can be used. Perhaps somebody with a wheelchair can go up there and take some photos with them looking a bit annoyed and then send the photos into the Press so that a DDA-based case can be brought against whoever made this stupid decision. Magicman!
  • Score: -1

11:46am Wed 5 Mar 14

pedalling paul says...

If anyone cares to visit http://www.scoot-utc
.com/ they will learn how York's linked traffic lights operate. What would be helpful to learn, is the geographical extent of scoot in York, and whether there are any junctions that still need to be added. Also does York's installation have the latest software?
If anyone cares to visit http://www.scoot-utc .com/ they will learn how York's linked traffic lights operate. What would be helpful to learn, is the geographical extent of scoot in York, and whether there are any junctions that still need to be added. Also does York's installation have the latest software? pedalling paul
  • Score: -3

12:39pm Wed 5 Mar 14

strangebuttrue? says...

Read that Paul. It says:

"which enables the public to make better-informed choices on travel modes and routes"
Take that as helps the council bully motorist out of cars or making them drive miles round to avoid delays?

"as well as delivering real improvements to air quality."
Then they should be ashamed of themselves as the council say pollution has increased by as much as 48% in recent years with no increase in volume of traffic.

"has helped ensure that the initial aims and future ambitions of the City Council are met"
As the council aims and ambitions appear to be to rid the city of cars by bullying motorist out of them through causing maximum disruption to York's traffic network, delaying vehicles and increasing journey times and costs and generally making the lives of residents miserable then - job done.
Read that Paul. It says: "which enables the public to make better-informed choices on travel modes and routes" Take that as helps the council bully motorist out of cars or making them drive miles round to avoid delays? "as well as delivering real improvements to air quality." Then they should be ashamed of themselves as the council say pollution has increased by as much as 48% in recent years with no increase in volume of traffic. "has helped ensure that the initial aims and future ambitions of the City Council are met" As the council aims and ambitions appear to be to rid the city of cars by bullying motorist out of them through causing maximum disruption to York's traffic network, delaying vehicles and increasing journey times and costs and generally making the lives of residents miserable then - job done. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 2

4:32am Thu 6 Mar 14

Magicman! says...

pedalling paul wrote:
If anyone cares to visit http://www.scoot-utc

.com/ they will learn how York's linked traffic lights operate. What would be helpful to learn, is the geographical extent of scoot in York, and whether there are any junctions that still need to be added. Also does York's installation have the latest software?
If York did have this 'Scoot' thingy, I would not have approached the traffic lights at Monkgate heading into the city centre at 2.30am, and as I approached they went red - not to change again for 6 minutes after zero vehicles had gone through... and at Peasholme Green at 2.50am I would not have had to wait at a red light there whilst zero traffic went through and the traffic lights just went through their pre-set timed procedure as they always do... and nether would I have got a red light in coppergate to then have to wait for a pedestrian phase to go green even though there was nobody around and the button hadn't even been pushed.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: If anyone cares to visit http://www.scoot-utc .com/ they will learn how York's linked traffic lights operate. What would be helpful to learn, is the geographical extent of scoot in York, and whether there are any junctions that still need to be added. Also does York's installation have the latest software?[/p][/quote]If York did have this 'Scoot' thingy, I would not have approached the traffic lights at Monkgate heading into the city centre at 2.30am, and as I approached they went red - not to change again for 6 minutes after zero vehicles had gone through... and at Peasholme Green at 2.50am I would not have had to wait at a red light there whilst zero traffic went through and the traffic lights just went through their pre-set timed procedure as they always do... and nether would I have got a red light in coppergate to then have to wait for a pedestrian phase to go green even though there was nobody around and the button hadn't even been pushed. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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