These are public roads (From York Press)

Absolutely correct!

I wonder how many of the residents of Westminster Road and The Avenue own cars? I would bet it's pretty much all of them. And I wonder how many of these people drive their cars down other residential streets? Again, pretty much all of them.

I'm sick of hearing about these moaning, whinging people. You own your house and the land it sits on. You don't own the road.

By blocking the junction of these roads they would not become private, they would remain public roads but would effectively become cul-de-sacs. Their upkeep would continue to be paid for by council tax just as it is now.

As someone who lives in a cul-de-sac himself, you would think that AP Cox would recognise why residents of these streets would want their streets to be no through roads.

In al fairness to the residents of these roads who indeed would blame them It's not as if COYcouncil haven't played fast and loose with public rights of way in the past. The gating of back alleys is one example which may have some merit; however can they really justify the gating of Bishophill and yet choose to do nothing about the constant problems in the narrow terraced streets of South Bank for example. My advise to Westminster rd is simple, get yourselves a couple of councillors as resident and start agitating and organising. A useful ploy is to ask for permission to tarmac and park on the grass verges ( worked beautifully on Nunthorpe Grove ). I don't approve of such selfish behaviour myself (living as I do in one of the aforementioned and ignored terraced streets) and think this is another example of what a small minded self centred little nation we have become but best of luck; after all if nothing else property prices will rise.

FortyFour wrote:
By blocking the junction of these roads they would not become private, they would remain public roads but would effectively become cul-de-sacs. Their upkeep would continue to be paid for by council tax just as it is now.

As someone who lives in a cul-de-sac himself, you would think that AP Cox would recognise why residents of these streets would want their streets to be no through roads.

Westminster Road and The Avenue are not cul-de-sacs.

If you want to live in a cul-de-sac then buy a house in a cul-de-sac.

If you buy a house in a through road, then expect traffic to pass by.

It's not rocket science is it!!!

Exactly. If these residents want the equivalent of a gated community then they should pay for it entirely... and I'm not just talking about making the road privately funded, I'm also talking about bin collections, street lighting, litter picking, grass cutting, tree trimming etc. Given the state of some private roads (there's one in Rawcliffe, Melton Drive, which is in a terrible state... or Muncastergate - which after about 15 years of road deterioration they have finally paid out to resurface it, but only using poor mans loose chippings, so the cracking and deterioration is still there but now masked under a blanket of grey until after the winter once the snow has broken it all up again) privately-funded maintenance is an expensive job.

The Water End traffic lane was just a carriage that the Westminster Road residents piggybacked onto as they could see that would gain support so they thought their little scheme might get support too. Traffic is now only slightly better on Water End because the traffic light timings have been altered at the cost of longer queues on the A19, and Westminster Road residents will continue to moan until they get a shiny bollard in the middle of their street - which if you consider that the whiney motorists eventually got their way over the traffic lane, the residents will probably get their way too... which in both cases is scandallous. ("Clifton Green-gate"?)