What a set-back

What a set-back

What a set-back

First published in Letters by

THE gleeful response to the re-opening of Lendal Bridge by some opposition councillors appears to reflect the concerns I expressed last week (Letters, April 1).

Sadly the polarisation of the debate (aided by overt politicking from the same councillors and a poor implementation of the trial) has meant that the evidence presented by the Institute of Transport Studies in Leeds will not play a primary role in determining the best outcome for York.

The policy imperative must still to be to tackle city-centre congestion in York if there is to be a coherent growth strategy.

In much the same way as inaction against climate change endangers the planet, inertia is not an option in York.

The worry is this will set back tackling congestion in York for years.

I hope opposition councillors prove me wrong by joining the proposed independently chaired cross-party commission and that the independent report may yet prove useful in pointing towards solutions.

Richard Bridge, Holgate Road, York.

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:59am Thu 10 Apr 14

roclank2000 says...

The first letter I've read since the decision was taken is one from Dick Bridge.
The first letter I've read since the decision was taken is one from Dick Bridge. roclank2000
  • Score: -21

12:03pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Tiv says...

The majority of drivers that cross the bridge during the day are doing so to carry out their jobs of work. They are the wealth makers and all the trial did was harm them. Let the traffic flow and prosperity will grow for all.
The majority of drivers that cross the bridge during the day are doing so to carry out their jobs of work. They are the wealth makers and all the trial did was harm them. Let the traffic flow and prosperity will grow for all. Tiv
  • Score: -33

4:55pm Thu 10 Apr 14

wallman says...

I'd like to see all the people who like the bridge shut not use it now
I'd like to see all the people who like the bridge shut not use it now wallman
  • Score: -39

6:34pm Thu 10 Apr 14

ColdAsChristmas says...

I still don't understand how closing a main route through York eases congestion. Surely it just moves the congestion elsewhere but making it worse as there is one less route. In many cases this means travelling further too, meaning more fuel burnt. I just don't get the logic?
At least the ruling Council have been made to see sense.
I still don't understand how closing a main route through York eases congestion. Surely it just moves the congestion elsewhere but making it worse as there is one less route. In many cases this means travelling further too, meaning more fuel burnt. I just don't get the logic? At least the ruling Council have been made to see sense. ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: -28

8:42pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
I still don't understand how closing a main route through York eases congestion. Surely it just moves the congestion elsewhere but making it worse as there is one less route. In many cases this means travelling further too, meaning more fuel burnt. I just don't get the logic?
At least the ruling Council have been made to see sense.
First they would have to prove that there was congestion, rather than just assert it. It has been mentioned several times that there are no more cars on the road than there were ten years ago. "Choking on fumes" is another popular catchphrase. Where? I am just a pedestrian with a sensitive hooter and I never find myself "choking". They like to cite "gridlock", but where is it? Give me the time and place where I can see this gridlock and I will do my best to be there.
[quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: I still don't understand how closing a main route through York eases congestion. Surely it just moves the congestion elsewhere but making it worse as there is one less route. In many cases this means travelling further too, meaning more fuel burnt. I just don't get the logic? At least the ruling Council have been made to see sense.[/p][/quote]First they would have to prove that there was congestion, rather than just assert it. It has been mentioned several times that there are no more cars on the road than there were ten years ago. "Choking on fumes" is another popular catchphrase. Where? I am just a pedestrian with a sensitive hooter and I never find myself "choking". They like to cite "gridlock", but where is it? Give me the time and place where I can see this gridlock and I will do my best to be there. Pinza-C55
  • Score: -10

9:18pm Thu 10 Apr 14

strangebuttrue? says...

"Sadly the polarisation of the debate"
The only things that seem to be polarised in York is the thinking of those who wish to make this a car free city and the methods they employ in attempting to bring this about.
The other thing being the score adjuster.
"Sadly the polarisation of the debate" The only things that seem to be polarised in York is the thinking of those who wish to make this a car free city and the methods they employ in attempting to bring this about. The other thing being the score adjuster. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -4

10:31pm Thu 10 Apr 14

Dr Robert says...

Score adjuster or what remains of labour voters.
Score adjuster or what remains of labour voters. Dr Robert
  • Score: -23

4:54am Fri 11 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

Dr Robert wrote:
Score adjuster or what remains of labour voters.
Not enough votes for it to be the score adjuster... if it was, the pro-closure comments would be on +100 or more by now. Remember too there was an anti-closure vote rigger too - watching the scores on certain pages was quite funny really... one day a comment would be on -200, the next it'd be on +500, the next day -700, the next day +1200 as the vote riggers with conflicting agenda's tried to outdo each other!
[quote][p][bold]Dr Robert[/bold] wrote: Score adjuster or what remains of labour voters.[/p][/quote]Not enough votes for it to be the score adjuster... if it was, the pro-closure comments would be on +100 or more by now. Remember too there was an anti-closure vote rigger too - watching the scores on certain pages was quite funny really... one day a comment would be on -200, the next it'd be on +500, the next day -700, the next day +1200 as the vote riggers with conflicting agenda's tried to outdo each other! Magicman!
  • Score: -21

1:20pm Fri 11 Apr 14

mel_drew says...

I'm sure there is more than one score hacker, using more than one method. Recently, there have been hints in these columns on a way to do it, but it's a slow and tedious method, probably that being used on these comments today to give the modest number of negative scores. There must be different way of achieving the much higher numbers that we've seen recently.

In any event, this newspaper may as well get rid of the facility, because no one can believe them any more.
I'm sure there is more than one score hacker, using more than one method. Recently, there have been hints in these columns on a way to do it, but it's a slow and tedious method, probably that being used on these comments today to give the modest number of negative scores. There must be different way of achieving the much higher numbers that we've seen recently. In any event, this newspaper may as well get rid of the facility, because no one can believe them any more. mel_drew
  • Score: 1

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