Lendal Bridge fines near 26,000

Lendal Bridge fines total nears 26,000

Lendal Bridge fines total nears 26,000

First published in News
Last updated
York Press: Photograph of the Author by , mark.stead@thepress.co.uk

ALMOST 26,000 drivers have been told to pay fines for crossing Lendal Bridge since the controversial traffic trial began, it has today been revealed.

Latest figures produced by City of York Council show 20,455 motorists were issued with penalty charge notices - carrying a maximum £60 fine - for breaching the new bridge restrictions between September 23 and November 10.

It means 25,911 fine notices have now been sent out since CCTV enforcement of the trial - banning cars, vans, lorries and motorbikes from using the bridge between 10.30am and 5pm every day until the end of February - began.

If all fines were paid in full, this would total £1.55 million in penalties. However, the Labour-led council said its actual "net revenue" from the entire trial, based on current trends, is expected to be about £600,000, as about 90 per cent of drivers who pay a fine do so within 14 days so they are eligible for a £30 discount and others will successfully appeal.

Income from fines issued to foreign-licensed cars does not go to the council, while the authority said processing, set-up and monitoring costs were also taken into account. The £600,000 figure was provided by the council after it indicated earlier today that the estimated income from the trial would be higher.

Meanwhile, new traffic rules on Coppergate, which carry the same penalties for breaches as Lendal Bridge, have seen 3,401 fines issued between September 23 and November 3.

An update report on the overall impact of the trial, posted on the council's website today, said the bridge trial was "not causing significant increases in travel time" on Park&Ride routes.

It said September traffic levels on Foss Islands Road and Water End, at Clifton Bridge, had risen year-on-year, while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road, Boroughbridge Road and Malton Road. However, it also said the number of cars using Foss Islands Road had decreased slightly following the first month of the trial, although Water End was busier.

Officials said traffic patterns were "still settling down", but they believed more drivers were obeying the Lendal Bridge restrictions and motorists were changing the time of day when they travel.

The week when the most Lendal Bridge fines - 4,138 - were issued was between October 28 and November 3, when schools were closed for half-term. A further 3,947 penalty charge notices related to the previous week, when half-term fell at schools in some other areas,

The council report said: "Out of the total number of penalty charge notices issued, some will be successful at appeal, which can take up to three weeks, so the actual number of viable penalty charge notices will actually be lower."

Darren Richardson, the council's director of city and environmental services, said the aim of the trial was not to generate revenue, but to cut traffic crossing Lendal Bridge and heading into the city-centre "as part of a long-term vision to create an even more attractive and thriving city-centre for everybody". He said any income to the council would be ring-fenced for investment in highways and transport schemes.

“The purpose of the trial and consultation is to find out how this scheme affects all traffic movements around the city, but also how we can learn from any issues whichmay arise along the way, so that we are in the best position to decide if this scheme could become a more longer-term viable option," he said.

However, Conservative leader Coun Ian Gillies said the figures for fines were "deeply worrying". He said: “They are getting worse, not better, as the months go on, demonstrating that the council still doesn't have its signage right, and the result is that the reputation of York as a tourist city is being tarnished."

He said there were "no significant changes" in Park&Ride travel times despite one of the trial's aims being to speed up bus journeys, and no information had been provided about whether bus usage had risen.

He said: "Water End, in particular, does not need much in the way of congestion to bring traffic there to a standstill, and looking at these statistics one has to begin to question what tangible benefits the closure of Lendal Bridge is actually bringing to our city."

Fellow Conservative councillor Chris Steward said the trial was causing "a lot of pain for very little gain", and while there were "negligible improvements" on bus times, he believed shoppers were heading elsewhere and other roads were suffering congestion problems.

Liberal Democrat leader Coun Keith Aspden said the figures showed the "continued failure" of the trial, saying: "So far, it has done nothing to improve bus reliability and has led to a significant increase of traffic on Clifton Bridge and Foss Islands Road.

"Meanwhile, city-centre footfall is down and businesses are suffering. The only winners seem to be the council who are raking in the money as thousands of residents and visitors are fined every week”.

Coun Andy D'Agorne, who leads the council's Green group, said: "The level of compliance is disappointing, but the impact on Clifton Bridge and Foss Islands Rd appears to be minimal.

"This is encouraging in terms of the potential to further reduce cross-city driving by those with alternative options available. I would like to see the council including air quality data in these reports."

Mr Richardson said the council had launched a new online journey planner at itravelyork.info to provide "tailored transport options" around York, while a map of the 65 signs indicating the bridge restrictions was at york.gov.uk/citycentreimprovements.

He said some sat nav companies' devices could not incorporate the restrictions because it was a temporary measure, but Google Maps and tablet-based sat nav apps and route-finders were able to take the bridge trial into account.

Comments (129)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:15pm Tue 19 Nov 13

imassey says...

Stand by for the usual comments from the usual people.

In summary: inadequate signage, satnav reliance, cash-cow, out, reduced footfall, etc
Stand by for the usual comments from the usual people. In summary: inadequate signage, satnav reliance, cash-cow, out, reduced footfall, etc imassey
  • Score: -58

2:23pm Tue 19 Nov 13

yorkshirenews says...

If so many are successful at appeal, then they must be something not compliant about the signs ?
Further advice here for anyone wanting to appeal : http://forums.pepipo
o.com/
If so many are successful at appeal, then they must be something not compliant about the signs ? Further advice here for anyone wanting to appeal : http://forums.pepipo o.com/ yorkshirenews
  • Score: 37

2:35pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Fabius the Delayer says...

New £10m bridge to open up York Central site for homes and offices
City of York Council announced yesterday it will be investing the sum from its £28 million economic infrastructure fund to build a bridge to give access to the York Central site.

Now you know where the moneys coming from don't You!

Close one bridge to pay for another one this is a blinder..
New £10m bridge to open up York Central site for homes and offices City of York Council announced yesterday it will be investing the sum from its £28 million economic infrastructure fund to build a bridge to give access to the York Central site. Now you know where the moneys coming from don't You! Close one bridge to pay for another one this is a blinder.. Fabius the Delayer
  • Score: 47

2:40pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Platform9 says...

..
.. Platform9
  • Score: 5

2:41pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Platform9 says...

"although Water End was busier"

That's a nice way of saying Water Lane and Water End have been grid-locked from 4pm to 6:30pm each day!
"although Water End was busier" That's a nice way of saying Water Lane and Water End have been grid-locked from 4pm to 6:30pm each day! Platform9
  • Score: 77

2:54pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Dave Ruddock says...

Well York was renown for POLOs , nothing in the middle ?????
Well York was renown for POLOs , nothing in the middle ????? Dave Ruddock
  • Score: 32

3:10pm Tue 19 Nov 13

asd says...

Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS
Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS asd
  • Score: 82

3:18pm Tue 19 Nov 13

MorkofYork says...

When they've finished destroying the city and oppressing the residents they'll turn round and say "look less cars, aren't we great ?"

No.

James is a poor leader, they could have managed the roads without coming across like a bunch of fanatics. Now even if you agree with what they're doing you have good reason to disagree with how they're doing it.
When they've finished destroying the city and oppressing the residents they'll turn round and say "look less cars, aren't we great ?" No. James is a poor leader, they could have managed the roads without coming across like a bunch of fanatics. Now even if you agree with what they're doing you have good reason to disagree with how they're doing it. MorkofYork
  • Score: 63

3:20pm Tue 19 Nov 13

JHardacre says...

"...the bridge trial was "not causing significant increases in travel time" on Park&Ride routes."

Excuse me but wasn't the idea to DECREASE bus travel times?
"...the bridge trial was "not causing significant increases in travel time" on Park&Ride routes." Excuse me but wasn't the idea to DECREASE bus travel times? JHardacre
  • Score: 91

3:37pm Tue 19 Nov 13

again says...

It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax.

I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.
It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax. I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure. again
  • Score: -53

3:44pm Tue 19 Nov 13

bolero says...

Platform9 wrote:
"although Water End was busier" That's a nice way of saying Water Lane and Water End have been grid-locked from 4pm to 6:30pm each day!
So no change there then?
[quote][p][bold]Platform9[/bold] wrote: "although Water End was busier" That's a nice way of saying Water Lane and Water End have been grid-locked from 4pm to 6:30pm each day![/p][/quote]So no change there then? bolero
  • Score: 11

3:46pm Tue 19 Nov 13

meme says...

I agree I thought target was to improve bus timings
If they are not improved its a failure
I agree I thought target was to improve bus timings If they are not improved its a failure meme
  • Score: 51

3:47pm Tue 19 Nov 13

JasBro says...

They're lying about traffic levels falling on Leeman Road, and the increase at Water End has been much more than any year on year increase.

I can't say anything about the council's other comments, but the two that I have personal experience, I know are lies.
They're lying about traffic levels falling on Leeman Road, and the increase at Water End has been much more than any year on year increase. I can't say anything about the council's other comments, but the two that I have personal experience, I know are lies. JasBro
  • Score: 63

3:54pm Tue 19 Nov 13

YorkPatrol says...

"while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road"

Is this some sort of joke? The traffic down Leeman Road has never been worse!
"while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road" Is this some sort of joke? The traffic down Leeman Road has never been worse! YorkPatrol
  • Score: 73

3:59pm Tue 19 Nov 13

buzzy_bee says...

I read that it was to make the city more attractive to visitors and it would alo reduce traffic and reduce bus times.

It would only reduce bus times that are actually routed over Lendal Bridge. Meanwhile, all other buses have to wait in the extra traffic caused by the closure of the bridge.

It seems to me that this is more about raising revenue than anything else. I have never agreed with the closure and yet I do not drive and my bus is routed to use Lendal Bridge. If its not about raising revenue then I urge the council to cancel all tickets and refund those that have already paid.

As for the signage, it is poor. One sign I saw, near the Theatre Royal said Lendal Bridge is closed; visitors do not know where Lendal bridge is.

It was a bad idea before it was ill thought out.
I read that it was to make the city more attractive to visitors and it would alo reduce traffic and reduce bus times. It would only reduce bus times that are actually routed over Lendal Bridge. Meanwhile, all other buses have to wait in the extra traffic caused by the closure of the bridge. It seems to me that this is more about raising revenue than anything else. I have never agreed with the closure and yet I do not drive and my bus is routed to use Lendal Bridge. If its not about raising revenue then I urge the council to cancel all tickets and refund those that have already paid. As for the signage, it is poor. One sign I saw, near the Theatre Royal said Lendal Bridge is closed; visitors do not know where Lendal bridge is. It was a bad idea before it was ill thought out. buzzy_bee
  • Score: 64

4:00pm Tue 19 Nov 13

JasBro says...

YorkPatrol wrote:
"while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road"

Is this some sort of joke? The traffic down Leeman Road has never been worse!
They've been lying about this for weeks, but they can't seriously think that anybody will believe them, when the traffic jams are right there in front of our eyes every day.
[quote][p][bold]YorkPatrol[/bold] wrote: "while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road" Is this some sort of joke? The traffic down Leeman Road has never been worse![/p][/quote]They've been lying about this for weeks, but they can't seriously think that anybody will believe them, when the traffic jams are right there in front of our eyes every day. JasBro
  • Score: 64

4:09pm Tue 19 Nov 13

mutley12321 says...

again wrote:
It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax. I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.
Hello Again,

Can I ask what you are basing this on?

Do you honestly think the fines received by the council will go to improving local services such gritting, waste removal, road improvements or reducing our council tax bills as you suggest? I've seen no evidence that this will be the case?
[quote][p][bold]again[/bold] wrote: It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax. I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.[/p][/quote]Hello Again, Can I ask what you are basing this on? Do you honestly think the fines received by the council will go to improving local services such gritting, waste removal, road improvements or reducing our council tax bills as you suggest? I've seen no evidence that this will be the case? mutley12321
  • Score: 49

4:16pm Tue 19 Nov 13

yorkie76 says...

The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful.
However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.
The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up. yorkie76
  • Score: 40

4:19pm Tue 19 Nov 13

pedalling paul says...

asd wrote:
Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS
Sounds almost as if you live within cycling distance of work................
Tell us why you choose to drive.
[quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS[/p][/quote]Sounds almost as if you live within cycling distance of work................ Tell us why you choose to drive. pedalling paul
  • Score: -94

4:25pm Tue 19 Nov 13

yorkie76 says...

I agree with pedalling Paul's comment. I am a driver and a cyclist. In York I will cycle everywhere as it is so much quicker and cheaper. asd, you should give it a go. I understand if you have a work van and need to carry heavy things but if not, why don't you give cycling a go.
I agree with pedalling Paul's comment. I am a driver and a cyclist. In York I will cycle everywhere as it is so much quicker and cheaper. asd, you should give it a go. I understand if you have a work van and need to carry heavy things but if not, why don't you give cycling a go. yorkie76
  • Score: -55

4:27pm Tue 19 Nov 13

mutley12321 says...

Open question to any forumista.

Have the council documented anywhere what they would consider the bridge closure to be defined a success? Financial income I would hope is not the only consideration.

It’s clear there are some gaps in the response from the Council which seem more propaganda than fair and balanced in content. It suggests Park and Ride travel times have increased, confirmation by how long and on what routes would be more use than the response provided. Are increased travel P&R times deemed a success?

September travel times on Foss Islands, Water End and Clifton Bridge have increased. This must have been expected as this is a direct consequence of closing Lendal Bridge? Suggesting they have increased year on year is without merit and doesn’t add anything to the debate.

Traffic patterns are settling down? Clearly no work was been undertaken by the council here. Surely, any plan before formal implementation should have provided detailed consideration of to the effects of vehicle travel in the short, medium and long term with success factors benchmarked against these.
Open question to any forumista. Have the council documented anywhere what they would consider the bridge closure to be defined a success? Financial income I would hope is not the only consideration. It’s clear there are some gaps in the response from the Council which seem more propaganda than fair and balanced in content. It suggests Park and Ride travel times have increased, confirmation by how long and on what routes would be more use than the response provided. Are increased travel P&R times deemed a success? September travel times on Foss Islands, Water End and Clifton Bridge have increased. This must have been expected as this is a direct consequence of closing Lendal Bridge? Suggesting they have increased year on year is without merit and doesn’t add anything to the debate. Traffic patterns are settling down? Clearly no work was been undertaken by the council here. Surely, any plan before formal implementation should have provided detailed consideration of to the effects of vehicle travel in the short, medium and long term with success factors benchmarked against these. mutley12321
  • Score: 41

4:29pm Tue 19 Nov 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

mutley12321 wrote:
again wrote:
It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax. I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.
Hello Again,

Can I ask what you are basing this on?

Do you honestly think the fines received by the council will go to improving local services such gritting, waste removal, road improvements or reducing our council tax bills as you suggest? I've seen no evidence that this will be the case?
Not when there's some arts barges or vanity project cycle lanes to "invest" in!
[quote][p][bold]mutley12321[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]again[/bold] wrote: It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax. I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.[/p][/quote]Hello Again, Can I ask what you are basing this on? Do you honestly think the fines received by the council will go to improving local services such gritting, waste removal, road improvements or reducing our council tax bills as you suggest? I've seen no evidence that this will be the case?[/p][/quote]Not when there's some arts barges or vanity project cycle lanes to "invest" in! AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 29

4:34pm Tue 19 Nov 13

24.2.1969bestcitygoalever... says...

That's quite a 'toll'...
That's quite a 'toll'... 24.2.1969bestcitygoalever...
  • Score: 17

4:38pm Tue 19 Nov 13

24.2.1969bestcitygoalever... says...

yorkie76 wrote:
I agree with pedalling Paul's comment. I am a driver and a cyclist. In York I will cycle everywhere as it is so much quicker and cheaper. asd, you should give it a go. I understand if you have a work van and need to carry heavy things but if not, why don't you give cycling a go.
I walk. Also beats the traffic in York more often than not.
[quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: I agree with pedalling Paul's comment. I am a driver and a cyclist. In York I will cycle everywhere as it is so much quicker and cheaper. asd, you should give it a go. I understand if you have a work van and need to carry heavy things but if not, why don't you give cycling a go.[/p][/quote]I walk. Also beats the traffic in York more often than not. 24.2.1969bestcitygoalever...
  • Score: -17

4:38pm Tue 19 Nov 13

VINNIE J says...

yorkie76 wrote:
The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful.
However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.
Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.
[quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.[/p][/quote]Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention. VINNIE J
  • Score: -59

4:39pm Tue 19 Nov 13

magicadey says...

on bootham coming in to town it says alternative route turn left... then there are no more signs telling you where to go!!
on bootham coming in to town it says alternative route turn left... then there are no more signs telling you where to go!! magicadey
  • Score: 38

4:43pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Richard Catton says...

Nearer the election in 2015 I suggest a concerted effort of campaigning is launched, not only to remove the Labour group from power but also to ensure that targeted individuals within the party lose their seats, hopefully ending their time on the council.

This is in no way party political, and there are those who will say "but one lot are as bad as the next". This is true, but we have to send a message to those we elect that if you behave in an undemocratic way and push your agendas on us, then you will only get one term in power and we will target the individuals responsible and vote you off the council.

Something to think about in a year or so perhaps
Nearer the election in 2015 I suggest a concerted effort of campaigning is launched, not only to remove the Labour group from power but also to ensure that targeted individuals within the party lose their seats, hopefully ending their time on the council. This is in no way party political, and there are those who will say "but one lot are as bad as the next". This is true, but we have to send a message to those we elect that if you behave in an undemocratic way and push your agendas on us, then you will only get one term in power and we will target the individuals responsible and vote you off the council. Something to think about in a year or so perhaps Richard Catton
  • Score: 61

4:45pm Tue 19 Nov 13

chelk says...

When I think of this council I am reminded of that famous quote
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
The Muppet Show rolls on
When I think of this council I am reminded of that famous quote "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" The Muppet Show rolls on chelk
  • Score: 32

4:48pm Tue 19 Nov 13

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

What ever it takes to make this a success is what will be done.

This Labour council will only report numbers that tell the story they want to hear and seemingly beleive they can wash over residents with impunity.

The findings and reports from the council so far are clear evidence of the outcome and the fact that it was never a trial in the first place.

26,000 fines is not the only measure of failure, it is pretty damning but the only statistic that will be accurately reported and even then reluctantly.

LABOUR KILLING YORK BY STEALTH.
What ever it takes to make this a success is what will be done. This Labour council will only report numbers that tell the story they want to hear and seemingly beleive they can wash over residents with impunity. The findings and reports from the council so far are clear evidence of the outcome and the fact that it was never a trial in the first place. 26,000 fines is not the only measure of failure, it is pretty damning but the only statistic that will be accurately reported and even then reluctantly. LABOUR KILLING YORK BY STEALTH. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 44

4:51pm Tue 19 Nov 13

yorkie76 says...

VINNIE J wrote:
yorkie76 wrote:
The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful.
However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.
Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.
Vinnie J, My argument is that they do not have any chance to change their route once they have realised they have made a wrong turn. You may be one of those people that never take a wrong turning but some drivers do and I think it it unfair to fine people for taking a wrong turn. As I said, it doesn't help when taxi/bus drivers are beeping at them within a second of the lights changing.
Your comment makes me think you are either a taxi driver, a bus driver or someone who doesn't understand what driving with undue care and attention is. People make mistakes and some people some times go the wrong way, lets not persecute all of them.
[quote][p][bold]VINNIE J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.[/p][/quote]Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.[/p][/quote]Vinnie J, My argument is that they do not have any chance to change their route once they have realised they have made a wrong turn. You may be one of those people that never take a wrong turning but some drivers do and I think it it unfair to fine people for taking a wrong turn. As I said, it doesn't help when taxi/bus drivers are beeping at them within a second of the lights changing. Your comment makes me think you are either a taxi driver, a bus driver or someone who doesn't understand what driving with undue care and attention is. People make mistakes and some people some times go the wrong way, lets not persecute all of them. yorkie76
  • Score: 46

4:53pm Tue 19 Nov 13

yorkie76 says...

Furthermore, have you ever driven in London, Leeds or any city you are not familiar with? Do you not think it can be confusing?
Furthermore, have you ever driven in London, Leeds or any city you are not familiar with? Do you not think it can be confusing? yorkie76
  • Score: 26

4:53pm Tue 19 Nov 13

ouseswimmer says...

I'm confused. Travel times have increased and they are all happy with this? I made the mistake of using the park and ride on the A19. It took nearly an hour to get back during the rush hour.
I'm confused. Travel times have increased and they are all happy with this? I made the mistake of using the park and ride on the A19. It took nearly an hour to get back during the rush hour. ouseswimmer
  • Score: 45

4:55pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Richard Catton says...

imassey wrote:
Stand by for the usual comments from the usual people.

In summary: inadequate signage, satnav reliance, cash-cow, out, reduced footfall, etc
If you didn't know better you'd think there were thousands of York residents and visitors who are really annoyed about the bridge closure and fines and traffic jams etc etc
[quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: Stand by for the usual comments from the usual people. In summary: inadequate signage, satnav reliance, cash-cow, out, reduced footfall, etc[/p][/quote]If you didn't know better you'd think there were thousands of York residents and visitors who are really annoyed about the bridge closure and fines and traffic jams etc etc Richard Catton
  • Score: 36

4:58pm Tue 19 Nov 13

tizme says...

so... 26,000 motorists are wrong, and a few on the council are correct? Rubbish!!! York is not going to be welcoming so many tourists in future. Wonder who'll be to blame. Can't wait for the local elections, and I USED to vote labour!!
so... 26,000 motorists are wrong, and a few on the council are correct? Rubbish!!! York is not going to be welcoming so many tourists in future. Wonder who'll be to blame. Can't wait for the local elections, and I USED to vote labour!! tizme
  • Score: 48

4:59pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Richard Catton says...

yorkie76 wrote:
Furthermore, have you ever driven in London, Leeds or any city you are not familiar with? Do you not think it can be confusing?
I agree, there are too many smart-ar5e drivers on here who have never made an honest mistake when driving in a strange city
[quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: Furthermore, have you ever driven in London, Leeds or any city you are not familiar with? Do you not think it can be confusing?[/p][/quote]I agree, there are too many smart-ar5e drivers on here who have never made an honest mistake when driving in a strange city Richard Catton
  • Score: 21

5:08pm Tue 19 Nov 13

anth!! says...

imassey wrote:
Stand by for the usual comments from the usual people.

In summary: inadequate signage, satnav reliance, cash-cow, out, reduced footfall, etc
Yeah, how exciting, cant wait.
[quote][p][bold]imassey[/bold] wrote: Stand by for the usual comments from the usual people. In summary: inadequate signage, satnav reliance, cash-cow, out, reduced footfall, etc[/p][/quote]Yeah, how exciting, cant wait. anth!!
  • Score: 11

5:09pm Tue 19 Nov 13

yorkandproud says...

Just walked over Lendal Bridge at 440pm in the dark, and the sign at the end of Lendal is not lit. Presume the bulb has gone. If you are going to run a trail for heavens sake make sure the lights on the signs work, and give the lemmings some sort of a chance
Just walked over Lendal Bridge at 440pm in the dark, and the sign at the end of Lendal is not lit. Presume the bulb has gone. If you are going to run a trail for heavens sake make sure the lights on the signs work, and give the lemmings some sort of a chance yorkandproud
  • Score: 51

5:13pm Tue 19 Nov 13

CaroleBaines says...

Absolutely astounding and of course, a scandal. I have said before that it is unnerving to always see someone drive over the bridge each time I walk over - but this puts it into perspective and then some. Wow.

Am not into Council bashing for the sake of it nor the faux-outrage by some on here who have other agendas, but this is just a fiasco and surely damages York's tourism and before too long, reputation.
Absolutely astounding and of course, a scandal. I have said before that it is unnerving to always see someone drive over the bridge each time I walk over - but this puts it into perspective and then some. Wow. Am not into Council bashing for the sake of it nor the faux-outrage by some on here who have other agendas, but this is just a fiasco and surely damages York's tourism and before too long, reputation. CaroleBaines
  • Score: 32

5:15pm Tue 19 Nov 13

VINNIE J says...

yorkie76 wrote:
Furthermore, have you ever driven in London, Leeds or any city you are not familiar with? Do you not think it can be confusing?
No not driven in london and would not attempt to, but yes I have other city's and because I don't know where I am going I look for the signs or more often than not use the park and rides. Ps you are wrong about my job.
[quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: Furthermore, have you ever driven in London, Leeds or any city you are not familiar with? Do you not think it can be confusing?[/p][/quote]No not driven in london and would not attempt to, but yes I have other city's and because I don't know where I am going I look for the signs or more often than not use the park and rides. Ps you are wrong about my job. VINNIE J
  • Score: -37

5:16pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Caecilius says...

Interesting to see that Ian Gillies is now admitting, in effect, that the reinstatement of the filter lane on Water End and the alteration in the timing of the lights at Clifton Green to favour traffic from that direction have achieved practically nothing. Which, of course, is precisely what the professional advice was at the time - advice that Coun Gillies, like Coun Alexander, chose to ignore in his eagerness to jump aboard the 'rip out the cycle lane' bandwagon.
Interesting to see that Ian Gillies is now admitting, in effect, that the reinstatement of the filter lane on Water End and the alteration in the timing of the lights at Clifton Green to favour traffic from that direction have achieved practically nothing. Which, of course, is precisely what the professional advice was at the time - advice that Coun Gillies, like Coun Alexander, chose to ignore in his eagerness to jump aboard the 'rip out the cycle lane' bandwagon. Caecilius
  • Score: -34

5:20pm Tue 19 Nov 13

AntMcM says...

We don't live in Ruritania! When will we get rid of King James Alexander?
We don't live in Ruritania! When will we get rid of King James Alexander? AntMcM
  • Score: 20

5:41pm Tue 19 Nov 13

shebear says...

Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing shebear
  • Score: -79

5:54pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Richard Catton says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
Ha ha, nice try
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]Ha ha, nice try Richard Catton
  • Score: 34

5:55pm Tue 19 Nov 13

eeoodares says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
Muppet!
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]Muppet! eeoodares
  • Score: 35

6:06pm Tue 19 Nov 13

york_chap says...

So that's more than 1 fine per minute during the restricted periods. I know there are some wealthy people out there and many who are in a hurry - but I refuse to believe that most of these 20,455 drivers chose to break the restriction knowingly. The signage is patently unclear and completely unfit for purpose.

So the council says that Park and Ride journey times have not materially increased. This suggests a slight increase - funny that, when I seem to recall councillors stating that one of the key arbitors of success for this trial would be the overall REDUCTION in bus journey times - and how this would be all but guaranteed by closing the bridge.

It's easy for councillors such as Merrett and D'Agorne to quote manipulated figures about traffic levels falling, as they don't have to sit in the increased congestion on Leeman Road, Shipton Road and the A1237 because they either live within walking distance of the centre or on the other side of town, relatively unaffected by the bridge closure. Unfortunately many of us normal York residents don't.

Fining tourists for driving into York whilst simultaneously increasing the journey times of p&r buses (heavily used by tourists) is hardly doing York's reputation any favours.
So that's more than 1 fine per minute during the restricted periods. I know there are some wealthy people out there and many who are in a hurry - but I refuse to believe that most of these 20,455 drivers chose to break the restriction knowingly. The signage is patently unclear and completely unfit for purpose. So the council says that Park and Ride journey times have not materially increased. This suggests a slight increase - funny that, when I seem to recall councillors stating that one of the key arbitors of success for this trial would be the overall REDUCTION in bus journey times - and how this would be all but guaranteed by closing the bridge. It's easy for councillors such as Merrett and D'Agorne to quote manipulated figures about traffic levels falling, as they don't have to sit in the increased congestion on Leeman Road, Shipton Road and the A1237 because they either live within walking distance of the centre or on the other side of town, relatively unaffected by the bridge closure. Unfortunately many of us normal York residents don't. Fining tourists for driving into York whilst simultaneously increasing the journey times of p&r buses (heavily used by tourists) is hardly doing York's reputation any favours. york_chap
  • Score: 39

6:09pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Silver says...

£800k if those people paid up early so the true figure of money raised is between £800k to £1.6m and we're about half way through this trial right? Assuming that the rate of fines stays at this rate CYC should have up to an additional £3.2m to spend. Yet we apparently have to cut £20k for gritting......so what is this money to be spent on then?
FYI I'm against the closure but well Labour don't understand democracy so I'm not going to list my reasons but will accept this "Trial" will carry on regardless of public opinion, so what will they spend this money recklessly on now?
£800k if those people paid up early so the true figure of money raised is between £800k to £1.6m and we're about half way through this trial right? Assuming that the rate of fines stays at this rate CYC should have up to an additional £3.2m to spend. Yet we apparently have to cut £20k for gritting......so what is this money to be spent on then? FYI I'm against the closure but well Labour don't understand democracy so I'm not going to list my reasons but will accept this "Trial" will carry on regardless of public opinion, so what will they spend this money recklessly on now? Silver
  • Score: 17

6:12pm Tue 19 Nov 13

shebear says...

How many of you went to the recently held local drop-in sessions to have your say on how the council allocates its budgets - your council tax?
How many of you went to the recently held local drop-in sessions to have your say on how the council allocates its budgets - your council tax? shebear
  • Score: -18

6:13pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Garrowby Turnoff says...

It'll only take one of the political parties to promise the removal of the restrictions as a vote catcher to screw up the "experiment".

As an aside I don't see how cyclists have any right to comment on motorised traffic restrictions. It has nothing to do with their privileged use of the City roads. And, considering the amount of money, effort and bullying that's been the result of ensuring their right to travel how they choose, a bit of acknowledgement that getting around York on a cycle is unsuitable for the majority of travelers wouldn't go amiss. The idea that cyclists have the moral high ground is a folly.
It'll only take one of the political parties to promise the removal of the restrictions as a vote catcher to screw up the "experiment". As an aside I don't see how cyclists have any right to comment on motorised traffic restrictions. It has nothing to do with their privileged use of the City roads. And, considering the amount of money, effort and bullying that's been the result of ensuring their right to travel how they choose, a bit of acknowledgement that getting around York on a cycle is unsuitable for the majority of travelers wouldn't go amiss. The idea that cyclists have the moral high ground is a folly. Garrowby Turnoff
  • Score: 39

6:16pm Tue 19 Nov 13

JHardacre says...

eeoodares wrote:
shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
Muppet!
"..Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads.."

Well perhaps it's about time that they did!
[quote][p][bold]eeoodares[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]Muppet![/p][/quote]"..Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads.." Well perhaps it's about time that they did! JHardacre
  • Score: 24

6:21pm Tue 19 Nov 13

JHardacre says...

pedalling paul wrote:
asd wrote:
Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS
Sounds almost as if you live within cycling distance of work................

Tell us why you choose to drive.
"Tell us why you choose to drive."

Look up from the gutter - maybe the weather might have something to do with it.

That and carrying things (shop purchases?), ferrying non paying passengers (fail to see that that is worse than taxis carrying fare paying passengers), continuing journey away from the centre, having a life...
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS[/p][/quote]Sounds almost as if you live within cycling distance of work................ Tell us why you choose to drive.[/p][/quote]"Tell us why you choose to drive." Look up from the gutter - maybe the weather might have something to do with it. That and carrying things (shop purchases?), ferrying non paying passengers (fail to see that that is worse than taxis carrying fare paying passengers), continuing journey away from the centre, having a life... JHardacre
  • Score: 55

6:25pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Digeorge says...

It is raising money for the new bridge to be built!
It is raising money for the new bridge to be built! Digeorge
  • Score: 4

6:42pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Mullarkian says...

What a money spinner! -
When are the council going to do this to Skeldergate & Ouse bridges?
What a money spinner! - When are the council going to do this to Skeldergate & Ouse bridges? Mullarkian
  • Score: -12

7:00pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Richard Catton says...

Priapus wrote:
asd wrote:
Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS
The only MUPPET is you. Walk or cycle if you want to get there quicker. Otherwise, sit in your car eating cheese nachos, getting fatter and fatter and more and more bitter. Alternatively, move to Milton Keynes that lovely town designed for the 'motorist'.
Actually Priapus, I eat Hot ‘n’ Kickin’ Chicken Goujons (now available in 2kg bags) while sitting in my car getting fatter and more bitter.
[quote][p][bold]Priapus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS[/p][/quote]The only MUPPET is you. Walk or cycle if you want to get there quicker. Otherwise, sit in your car eating cheese nachos, getting fatter and fatter and more and more bitter. Alternatively, move to Milton Keynes that lovely town designed for the 'motorist'.[/p][/quote]Actually Priapus, I eat Hot ‘n’ Kickin’ Chicken Goujons (now available in 2kg bags) while sitting in my car getting fatter and more bitter. Richard Catton
  • Score: 21

7:00pm Tue 19 Nov 13

24.2.1969bestcitygoalever... says...

Does this mean expenditure on more, easier to find, free, nicer public conveniences? A fragrant rose (white of course) in a glass stem vase & all the mod cons?
Does this mean expenditure on more, easier to find, free, nicer public conveniences? A fragrant rose (white of course) in a glass stem vase & all the mod cons? 24.2.1969bestcitygoalever...
  • Score: 9

7:02pm Tue 19 Nov 13

eeoodares says...

Priapus wrote:
asd wrote:
Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS
The only MUPPET is you. Walk or cycle if you want to get there quicker. Otherwise, sit in your car eating cheese nachos, getting fatter and fatter and more and more bitter. Alternatively, move to Milton Keynes that lovely town designed for the 'motorist'.
Priapus, if the amount of traffic has decreased but congestion and pollution has increased can you explain how this is the motorists fault? Perhaps a closer look at traffic management would make sense.

As far as your infantile statement about eating Nachos and getting fatter...this statement reminds me of another anti-vehicle individual on this site...could you be using multiple identities? Because if you are, you might like to choose one with a better personality and more broad ranging views.
[quote][p][bold]Priapus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS[/p][/quote]The only MUPPET is you. Walk or cycle if you want to get there quicker. Otherwise, sit in your car eating cheese nachos, getting fatter and fatter and more and more bitter. Alternatively, move to Milton Keynes that lovely town designed for the 'motorist'.[/p][/quote]Priapus, if the amount of traffic has decreased but congestion and pollution has increased can you explain how this is the motorists fault? Perhaps a closer look at traffic management would make sense. As far as your infantile statement about eating Nachos and getting fatter...this statement reminds me of another anti-vehicle individual on this site...could you be using multiple identities? Because if you are, you might like to choose one with a better personality and more broad ranging views. eeoodares
  • Score: 28

7:57pm Tue 19 Nov 13

MorkofYork says...

What's with the bunch of yellow signs at the theater end of Gillygate ? Could have sworn there was one advertising an event, something not bridge related anyway.

Are people supposed to read all those while they're cornering and keeping an eye on everything else ?
What's with the bunch of yellow signs at the theater end of Gillygate ? Could have sworn there was one advertising an event, something not bridge related anyway. Are people supposed to read all those while they're cornering and keeping an eye on everything else ? MorkofYork
  • Score: 26

8:28pm Tue 19 Nov 13

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

Caecilius wrote:
Interesting to see that Ian Gillies is now admitting, in effect, that the reinstatement of the filter lane on Water End and the alteration in the timing of the lights at Clifton Green to favour traffic from that direction have achieved practically nothing. Which, of course, is precisely what the professional advice was at the time - advice that Coun Gillies, like Coun Alexander, chose to ignore in his eagerness to jump aboard the 'rip out the cycle lane' bandwagon.
Give it up Caecilius, you know fine well that the Water End cycle lane was a shambles from start to finish.
[quote][p][bold]Caecilius[/bold] wrote: Interesting to see that Ian Gillies is now admitting, in effect, that the reinstatement of the filter lane on Water End and the alteration in the timing of the lights at Clifton Green to favour traffic from that direction have achieved practically nothing. Which, of course, is precisely what the professional advice was at the time - advice that Coun Gillies, like Coun Alexander, chose to ignore in his eagerness to jump aboard the 'rip out the cycle lane' bandwagon.[/p][/quote]Give it up Caecilius, you know fine well that the Water End cycle lane was a shambles from start to finish. NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: 28

8:37pm Tue 19 Nov 13

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

Richard Catton wrote:
Nearer the election in 2015 I suggest a concerted effort of campaigning is launched, not only to remove the Labour group from power but also to ensure that targeted individuals within the party lose their seats, hopefully ending their time on the council.

This is in no way party political, and there are those who will say "but one lot are as bad as the next". This is true, but we have to send a message to those we elect that if you behave in an undemocratic way and push your agendas on us, then you will only get one term in power and we will target the individuals responsible and vote you off the council.

Something to think about in a year or so perhaps
Just don't vote, it's not worth it, they aren't worth it, all voting does is encourage them and will just result in more of the same, it will take time, but just like a noisy child, if you ignore them by not turning out on polling day, they will go away eventually.
Chances are that it will get a lot worse before it gets better, but we have to show them we are in it for the long haul.

Vive La Révolution
[quote][p][bold]Richard Catton[/bold] wrote: Nearer the election in 2015 I suggest a concerted effort of campaigning is launched, not only to remove the Labour group from power but also to ensure that targeted individuals within the party lose their seats, hopefully ending their time on the council. This is in no way party political, and there are those who will say "but one lot are as bad as the next". This is true, but we have to send a message to those we elect that if you behave in an undemocratic way and push your agendas on us, then you will only get one term in power and we will target the individuals responsible and vote you off the council. Something to think about in a year or so perhaps[/p][/quote]Just don't vote, it's not worth it, they aren't worth it, all voting does is encourage them and will just result in more of the same, it will take time, but just like a noisy child, if you ignore them by not turning out on polling day, they will go away eventually. Chances are that it will get a lot worse before it gets better, but we have to show them we are in it for the long haul. Vive La Révolution NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: -8

8:50pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Just Passing says...

What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.
What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents. Just Passing
  • Score: -34

10:31pm Tue 19 Nov 13

PKH says...

Fishy60 wrote:
Just Passing wrote:
What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.
Good points there.

Would there be a defence for driving past a no entry sign if there were less than 65 signs warning of the restriction ahead?
Any visitor that looks at a street map of York before they come will see that road over Lendal Bridge is mark as the inner ringroad, it will seem absolutely absurd to them that the inner ringroad would have limited access and will think that Lendal Bridge must not be on the inner ringroad but elsewhere.
[quote][p][bold]Fishy60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Just Passing[/bold] wrote: What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.[/p][/quote]Good points there. Would there be a defence for driving past a no entry sign if there were less than 65 signs warning of the restriction ahead?[/p][/quote]Any visitor that looks at a street map of York before they come will see that road over Lendal Bridge is mark as the inner ringroad, it will seem absolutely absurd to them that the inner ringroad would have limited access and will think that Lendal Bridge must not be on the inner ringroad but elsewhere. PKH
  • Score: 38

10:39pm Tue 19 Nov 13

The OX says...

Dont forget the 11 days that the cameras were not working or were they turned off to keep figures down ??
Dont forget the 11 days that the cameras were not working or were they turned off to keep figures down ?? The OX
  • Score: 26

11:21pm Tue 19 Nov 13

strangebuttrue? says...

I would support anyone who chooses to cycle, walk or use the bus that is their own choice. We also have many who choose to use a car. So why is it that the anti car people think they an tell others who choose to use a car that they should not? As I have said before, just think if we had a change of thinking in this country and someone decided that we should encourage modal change in favour of the car and then started to implement measures making cycling very difficult, expensive and time consuming giving priority to cars and making sure that cycle journeys took twice as long or at times down right impossible. I am sure that people who choose to cycle would be up in arms. I for one would support them because this is supposed to be a free country and I see no reason for one section of society to be singled out and bullied in this way. I used to cycle quite a lot but when I advanced in my career and started working some 60 to 70 hours a week a long tiring cycle home became less attractive and I would choose to use the car. Then the council decided that they would try to make me use a bike or bus bullying and harassing me by making my car journey much longer and frustrating. That is when I abandoned the bike altogether my reasoning being that if you give in to bullies you are asking for more trouble. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the bridge signage, I don't know because I don't use the bridge, is this closure not just another direct attack on residents who choose to use cars. The council know that there will be more congestion elsewhere particularly in residential areas, you know those places where people live and don't have a choice about breathing in the council create pollution. The denial of the extra congestion created should not come as a surprise this trail is going to be a success and it already is being judged as such by the council. Lets face it in the eyes of the council - Less traffic on Lendal Bridge - success, Less pollution on Lendal Bridge - success. Doubling of journey times by car - success.
You will note that they say traffic patters are still settling down. What they mean by this is you are getting conditioned to the longer journey times and will stop opposing them if they keep this up for long enough. They used the same tactic in Scarborough - "give it six months to see how it goes as the traffic settles down" they told the residents who were enraged by the sudden overnight change when all the new traffic lights were switched on and their town seemed to be gridlocked but with no extra car journeys. Sure enough six months later no one was complaining anymore just sitting in queues for hours that they did not need to be in and who gets the blame for that people who choose to use cars.
I for one am glad to see that people still feel strongly about this and keep trying to make themselves heard by a council who do not want to listen.
One final tip. Wherever possible use a major bus route for your car journey. Don't sit on the outer ring road in the council created congestion turn into town at the first P&R route you pass, no better still, go out of your way to do so and stick to routes used by busses. As you know big brother is watching and if a bus is being held up they will alter the lights to try to shorten the bus journey time if you are on the same road you will benefit too. You may have to travel further but you will get there quicker.
I would support anyone who chooses to cycle, walk or use the bus that is their own choice. We also have many who choose to use a car. So why is it that the anti car people think they an tell others who choose to use a car that they should not? As I have said before, just think if we had a change of thinking in this country and someone decided that we should encourage modal change in favour of the car and then started to implement measures making cycling very difficult, expensive and time consuming giving priority to cars and making sure that cycle journeys took twice as long or at times down right impossible. I am sure that people who choose to cycle would be up in arms. I for one would support them because this is supposed to be a free country and I see no reason for one section of society to be singled out and bullied in this way. I used to cycle quite a lot but when I advanced in my career and started working some 60 to 70 hours a week a long tiring cycle home became less attractive and I would choose to use the car. Then the council decided that they would try to make me use a bike or bus bullying and harassing me by making my car journey much longer and frustrating. That is when I abandoned the bike altogether my reasoning being that if you give in to bullies you are asking for more trouble. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the bridge signage, I don't know because I don't use the bridge, is this closure not just another direct attack on residents who choose to use cars. The council know that there will be more congestion elsewhere particularly in residential areas, you know those places where people live and don't have a choice about breathing in the council create pollution. The denial of the extra congestion created should not come as a surprise this trail is going to be a success and it already is being judged as such by the council. Lets face it in the eyes of the council - Less traffic on Lendal Bridge - success, Less pollution on Lendal Bridge - success. Doubling of journey times by car - success. You will note that they say traffic patters are still settling down. What they mean by this is you are getting conditioned to the longer journey times and will stop opposing them if they keep this up for long enough. They used the same tactic in Scarborough - "give it six months to see how it goes as the traffic settles down" they told the residents who were enraged by the sudden overnight change when all the new traffic lights were switched on and their town seemed to be gridlocked but with no extra car journeys. Sure enough six months later no one was complaining anymore just sitting in queues for hours that they did not need to be in and who gets the blame for that people who choose to use cars. I for one am glad to see that people still feel strongly about this and keep trying to make themselves heard by a council who do not want to listen. One final tip. Wherever possible use a major bus route for your car journey. Don't sit on the outer ring road in the council created congestion turn into town at the first P&R route you pass, no better still, go out of your way to do so and stick to routes used by busses. As you know big brother is watching and if a bus is being held up they will alter the lights to try to shorten the bus journey time if you are on the same road you will benefit too. You may have to travel further but you will get there quicker. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 30

11:28pm Tue 19 Nov 13

Yorkie Car says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
"Why do people use cars, not bikes?" Ummhh.. because they need them for work, because they're elderly, because they're disabled, because they're transporting children, because they're transporting heavy things, because they're short of time, because they live out of the city, because the weather's rubbish.. and because they choose to !!! It's called freedom, something York Council don't respect.
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]"Why do people use cars, not bikes?" Ummhh.. because they need them for work, because they're elderly, because they're disabled, because they're transporting children, because they're transporting heavy things, because they're short of time, because they live out of the city, because the weather's rubbish.. and because they choose to !!! It's called freedom, something York Council don't respect. Yorkie Car
  • Score: 38

4:12am Wed 20 Nov 13

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

I just wonder why people are not experiencing what the council is reporting.

Journey times increased from 25 to 45minutes.

You can manipulate findings by deliberately taking measurements at times outside peak traffic. It meets the criteria but the methodology is flawed in favour of desired outcomes.

Bridge restriction in place 10:30, take my measures within the first hour, past am peak but before pm peak and hey presto, criteria met and findings favourable. We need to know the methodology so that the scam can be exposed.

We need to ask Cameron if he's happy that his government is funding this nonsence and comfortable with 26,000 fines so far. He's on twitter so everyone can ask him.
I just wonder why people are not experiencing what the council is reporting. Journey times increased from 25 to 45minutes. You can manipulate findings by deliberately taking measurements at times outside peak traffic. It meets the criteria but the methodology is flawed in favour of desired outcomes. Bridge restriction in place 10:30, take my measures within the first hour, past am peak but before pm peak and hey presto, criteria met and findings favourable. We need to know the methodology so that the scam can be exposed. We need to ask Cameron if he's happy that his government is funding this nonsence and comfortable with 26,000 fines so far. He's on twitter so everyone can ask him. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 21

7:30am Wed 20 Nov 13

Dazmond says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron. Dazmond
  • Score: 46

7:31am Wed 20 Nov 13

JasBro says...

Caecilius wrote:
Interesting to see that Ian Gillies is now admitting, in effect, that the reinstatement of the filter lane on Water End and the alteration in the timing of the lights at Clifton Green to favour traffic from that direction have achieved practically nothing. Which, of course, is precisely what the professional advice was at the time - advice that Coun Gillies, like Coun Alexander, chose to ignore in his eagerness to jump aboard the 'rip out the cycle lane' bandwagon.
The professional advice was wrong, that has been proved. Traffic congestion increased massively when the cycle lane was put in, decreased massively when it was taken out and stayed that way right up until Lendal Bridge closed. Everybody living in the area could see that quite clearly.

The so called professionals advising the council are cycle nazis and liars, who think that causing congestion is a good thing. What they fail to realise is that it's better for everyone if traffic is allowed to flow. Trying to bully people out of their cars has certainly not helped me as a pedestrian and cyclist, in fact it's caused a toxic atmosphere between road users that benefits nobody.
[quote][p][bold]Caecilius[/bold] wrote: Interesting to see that Ian Gillies is now admitting, in effect, that the reinstatement of the filter lane on Water End and the alteration in the timing of the lights at Clifton Green to favour traffic from that direction have achieved practically nothing. Which, of course, is precisely what the professional advice was at the time - advice that Coun Gillies, like Coun Alexander, chose to ignore in his eagerness to jump aboard the 'rip out the cycle lane' bandwagon.[/p][/quote]The professional advice was wrong, that has been proved. Traffic congestion increased massively when the cycle lane was put in, decreased massively when it was taken out and stayed that way right up until Lendal Bridge closed. Everybody living in the area could see that quite clearly. The so called professionals advising the council are cycle nazis and liars, who think that causing congestion is a good thing. What they fail to realise is that it's better for everyone if traffic is allowed to flow. Trying to bully people out of their cars has certainly not helped me as a pedestrian and cyclist, in fact it's caused a toxic atmosphere between road users that benefits nobody. JasBro
  • Score: 33

7:45am Wed 20 Nov 13

JasBro says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
The 20mph zones we're in Labour's election manifesto, so right or wrong, at least they were honest on that one.

Closing Lendal Bridge was not mentioned at all, not even a hint. So they have absolutely no democratic backing at all for it.

Had they not thought of this major transport planning policy in 2011, or did they just hide it?
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]The 20mph zones we're in Labour's election manifesto, so right or wrong, at least they were honest on that one. Closing Lendal Bridge was not mentioned at all, not even a hint. So they have absolutely no democratic backing at all for it. Had they not thought of this major transport planning policy in 2011, or did they just hide it? JasBro
  • Score: 20

7:50am Wed 20 Nov 13

Have to make a comment says...

Please could I ask the council to use the revenue to give us another green bin collection?
Please could I ask the council to use the revenue to give us another green bin collection? Have to make a comment
  • Score: 1

8:32am Wed 20 Nov 13

mjgyork says...

Dazmond wrote:
shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.
I repeat something which should be obvious: there is NO destination in York which can only be reached by crossing Lendal Bridge. Presumably the driver does not have dementia?
[quote][p][bold]Dazmond[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.[/p][/quote]I repeat something which should be obvious: there is NO destination in York which can only be reached by crossing Lendal Bridge. Presumably the driver does not have dementia? mjgyork
  • Score: -33

9:11am Wed 20 Nov 13

Mulgrave says...

Richard Catton wrote:
Nearer the election in 2015 I suggest a concerted effort of campaigning is launched, not only to remove the Labour group from power but also to ensure that targeted individuals within the party lose their seats, hopefully ending their time on the council.

This is in no way party political, and there are those who will say "but one lot are as bad as the next". This is true, but we have to send a message to those we elect that if you behave in an undemocratic way and push your agendas on us, then you will only get one term in power and we will target the individuals responsible and vote you off the council.

Something to think about in a year or so perhaps
Funny to think, back in the 70's when campaigning for better pay, Joe Gormley advocated a "Jag for every miner and a Mini for his wife". Of its time, but it could be argued that back a couple of generations it was the better off. non Labour voters, who were the most prevalent car owners and had to adapt to restrictive laws, such as speed limits on motorways and A roads, MOT tests and drink drive laws. We all take those for granted now, but I am not sure all the Labour voters who have worked hard over the last decades to also take car ownership for granted are quite so supportive of the "Labour" views on car ownership and use that are held by some on CoYC.. Unrestricted car use is not an option, but there are ways of approaching this. The different parties/candidates should be asked about and grilled repeatedly on this and their attitude to private car use before the next elections, and if there are any projects with such an impact as Lendal Bridge, these should be in the manifesto, not pulled out of a hat mid-term.
[quote][p][bold]Richard Catton[/bold] wrote: Nearer the election in 2015 I suggest a concerted effort of campaigning is launched, not only to remove the Labour group from power but also to ensure that targeted individuals within the party lose their seats, hopefully ending their time on the council. This is in no way party political, and there are those who will say "but one lot are as bad as the next". This is true, but we have to send a message to those we elect that if you behave in an undemocratic way and push your agendas on us, then you will only get one term in power and we will target the individuals responsible and vote you off the council. Something to think about in a year or so perhaps[/p][/quote]Funny to think, back in the 70's when campaigning for better pay, Joe Gormley advocated a "Jag for every miner and a Mini for his wife". Of its time, but it could be argued that back a couple of generations it was the better off. non Labour voters, who were the most prevalent car owners and had to adapt to restrictive laws, such as speed limits on motorways and A roads, MOT tests and drink drive laws. We all take those for granted now, but I am not sure all the Labour voters who have worked hard over the last decades to also take car ownership for granted are quite so supportive of the "Labour" views on car ownership and use that are held by some on CoYC.. Unrestricted car use is not an option, but there are ways of approaching this. The different parties/candidates should be asked about and grilled repeatedly on this and their attitude to private car use before the next elections, and if there are any projects with such an impact as Lendal Bridge, these should be in the manifesto, not pulled out of a hat mid-term. Mulgrave
  • Score: 16

9:54am Wed 20 Nov 13

maybejustmaybe says...

Has nobody realised that it isn't going to be cheap changing/removing all the inner ring road signs and road markings. Plus there is the cost of the new permanent signs when the closure goes 7am - 7pm.
Has nobody realised that it isn't going to be cheap changing/removing all the inner ring road signs and road markings. Plus there is the cost of the new permanent signs when the closure goes 7am - 7pm. maybejustmaybe
  • Score: 7

10:01am Wed 20 Nov 13

Happytoliveinyork says...

Tell our glorious leaders what you think by completing this short survey.

https://www.surveymo
nkey.com/s/lendalsur
vey
Tell our glorious leaders what you think by completing this short survey. https://www.surveymo nkey.com/s/lendalsur vey Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: 23

10:44am Wed 20 Nov 13

Jiffy says...

'It said September traffic levels on Foss Islands Road and Water End, at Clifton Bridge, had risen year-on-year, while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road, Boroughbridge Road'

You are having a laugh - as I walk down Leeman Rd at 4.30 every working day with traffic queued under the railway bridge & regularly as far back as 'The Junction' if not further. This only ever happened on very rare occasions prior to the closing of Lendal so guess what's causing it!!!

As a residfent of the Leeman Road area I can confirm that this has had a huge impact on the usage of our streets for diverting traffic (lets not forget we are also now only 1 on 2 possible access routes to the station).

I would be interested in pollution readings being done in the area now as compared to when the following assessment was done: http://www.yorkpress
.co.uk/news/9639291.
Plans_aim_to_improve
_air_quality_in_York
/. AQMA seems to have been forgotten about in this plan.

As recernt figures showed that poor air quality caused far more premature deaths in York than obesity & car accidents combined - come on CYC - let us have the figures!
'It said September traffic levels on Foss Islands Road and Water End, at Clifton Bridge, had risen year-on-year, while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road, Boroughbridge Road' You are having a laugh - as I walk down Leeman Rd at 4.30 every working day with traffic queued under the railway bridge & regularly as far back as 'The Junction' if not further. This only ever happened on very rare occasions prior to the closing of Lendal so guess what's causing it!!! As a residfent of the Leeman Road area I can confirm that this has had a huge impact on the usage of our streets for diverting traffic (lets not forget we are also now only 1 on 2 possible access routes to the station). I would be interested in pollution readings being done in the area now as compared to when the following assessment was done: http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/9639291. Plans_aim_to_improve _air_quality_in_York /. AQMA seems to have been forgotten about in this plan. As recernt figures showed that poor air quality caused far more premature deaths in York than obesity & car accidents combined - come on CYC - let us have the figures! Jiffy
  • Score: 23

10:47am Wed 20 Nov 13

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

We just need another 90,000 fines to be extorted from the gullible Lendal bridge-users and the council will be able to afford their new bridge.
We just need another 90,000 fines to be extorted from the gullible Lendal bridge-users and the council will be able to afford their new bridge. Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: -7

10:55am Wed 20 Nov 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

asd wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
asd wrote: Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS
Sounds almost as if you live within cycling distance of work................ Tell us why you choose to drive.
Because its 12 miles atleast to work you complete K**b and I have to pick my disabled son up too, ever tried to croggy a autistic boy you complete Tw*t.
There is no use arguing with these people. They refuse to acknowledge that not everyone lives on a bus route or in walking or cycling distance or has any other circumstances.

As long as they have their bike they are happy and no one else could at all be different...
[quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Their rigging it obviosly, I can tell you that now. I travel from Acomb daily and A1237 is a no go area either way, carr lane, borobridge rd, poppy rd is a nightmare too. Water end clifton Green overloaded. Cant wait for the real bad weather so my old time for work was 25 mins max, now its 45 mins Min so bad wetaher could be over an hour. The cr*p about pollution they spew out is unbelievable aswell as its all working well. MUPPETS[/p][/quote]Sounds almost as if you live within cycling distance of work................ Tell us why you choose to drive.[/p][/quote]Because its 12 miles atleast to work you complete K**b and I have to pick my disabled son up too, ever tried to croggy a autistic boy you complete Tw*t.[/p][/quote]There is no use arguing with these people. They refuse to acknowledge that not everyone lives on a bus route or in walking or cycling distance or has any other circumstances. As long as they have their bike they are happy and no one else could at all be different... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 36

10:59am Wed 20 Nov 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Jiffy wrote:
'It said September traffic levels on Foss Islands Road and Water End, at Clifton Bridge, had risen year-on-year, while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road, Boroughbridge Road'

You are having a laugh - as I walk down Leeman Rd at 4.30 every working day with traffic queued under the railway bridge & regularly as far back as 'The Junction' if not further. This only ever happened on very rare occasions prior to the closing of Lendal so guess what's causing it!!!

As a residfent of the Leeman Road area I can confirm that this has had a huge impact on the usage of our streets for diverting traffic (lets not forget we are also now only 1 on 2 possible access routes to the station).

I would be interested in pollution readings being done in the area now as compared to when the following assessment was done: http://www.yorkpress

.co.uk/news/9639291.

Plans_aim_to_improve

_air_quality_in_York

/. AQMA seems to have been forgotten about in this plan.

As recernt figures showed that poor air quality caused far more premature deaths in York than obesity & car accidents combined - come on CYC - let us have the figures!
Lies, damned lies and statistics as they say, though in this case even the statistics seem to be missing...
[quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: 'It said September traffic levels on Foss Islands Road and Water End, at Clifton Bridge, had risen year-on-year, while the volume had fallen slightly on Leeman Road, Boroughbridge Road' You are having a laugh - as I walk down Leeman Rd at 4.30 every working day with traffic queued under the railway bridge & regularly as far back as 'The Junction' if not further. This only ever happened on very rare occasions prior to the closing of Lendal so guess what's causing it!!! As a residfent of the Leeman Road area I can confirm that this has had a huge impact on the usage of our streets for diverting traffic (lets not forget we are also now only 1 on 2 possible access routes to the station). I would be interested in pollution readings being done in the area now as compared to when the following assessment was done: http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/9639291. Plans_aim_to_improve _air_quality_in_York /. AQMA seems to have been forgotten about in this plan. As recernt figures showed that poor air quality caused far more premature deaths in York than obesity & car accidents combined - come on CYC - let us have the figures![/p][/quote]Lies, damned lies and statistics as they say, though in this case even the statistics seem to be missing... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 19

11:14am Wed 20 Nov 13

Just Passing says...

PKH wrote:
Fishy60 wrote:
Just Passing wrote:
What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.
Good points there.

Would there be a defence for driving past a no entry sign if there were less than 65 signs warning of the restriction ahead?
Any visitor that looks at a street map of York before they come will see that road over Lendal Bridge is mark as the inner ringroad, it will seem absolutely absurd to them that the inner ringroad would have limited access and will think that Lendal Bridge must not be on the inner ringroad but elsewhere.
OK PKH but perhaps it is the ring roads that are now in the wrong place as the city expands. If we want a quieter city centre we need to move the through traffic routes out a bit as part of a wider plan (cycling, public transport, etc.). All the talk of dualling the outer ring road will only serve to keep the traffic close in. What is really needed is to move the northern ring road out and dual it so that it bypasses all of the villages that have now become dormitory towns such as Haxby, Wiggington, Strensall and Poppleton. Of course this would mean working with North Yorkshire County Council as it is they who control the land but it would be money better spent than simply trying to modify a broken infrastructure. We need to think longer term and prepare for the inevitable expansion of York rather than the current process where COYC can't see beyond its own little boundaries. Look and learn from the example of London - inner ring road, circular roads and M25 all gradually evolving with their city to keep through traffic away or the continent where you can drive all the way through The Netherlands to Germany without even seeing a town centre.
[quote][p][bold]PKH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fishy60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Just Passing[/bold] wrote: What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.[/p][/quote]Good points there. Would there be a defence for driving past a no entry sign if there were less than 65 signs warning of the restriction ahead?[/p][/quote]Any visitor that looks at a street map of York before they come will see that road over Lendal Bridge is mark as the inner ringroad, it will seem absolutely absurd to them that the inner ringroad would have limited access and will think that Lendal Bridge must not be on the inner ringroad but elsewhere.[/p][/quote]OK PKH but perhaps it is the ring roads that are now in the wrong place as the city expands. If we want a quieter city centre we need to move the through traffic routes out a bit as part of a wider plan (cycling, public transport, etc.). All the talk of dualling the outer ring road will only serve to keep the traffic close in. What is really needed is to move the northern ring road out and dual it so that it bypasses all of the villages that have now become dormitory towns such as Haxby, Wiggington, Strensall and Poppleton. Of course this would mean working with North Yorkshire County Council as it is they who control the land but it would be money better spent than simply trying to modify a broken infrastructure. We need to think longer term and prepare for the inevitable expansion of York rather than the current process where COYC can't see beyond its own little boundaries. Look and learn from the example of London - inner ring road, circular roads and M25 all gradually evolving with their city to keep through traffic away or the continent where you can drive all the way through The Netherlands to Germany without even seeing a town centre. Just Passing
  • Score: -12

11:19am Wed 20 Nov 13

Igiveinthen says...

Having read all the comments regarding the admittance by the CoYC that nearly 26,000 charges have been issued against drivers using Lendal Bridge, I have to say that there must be something wrong somewhere.
I would like to know if there is anyway that the CoYC and in particular Councillor Alexander as leader, be held to account and explain why the number of drivers has reached such proportions as I don’t believe that 26,000 drivers can all be wrong, in fact the figure is obscene.
Having read all the comments regarding the admittance by the CoYC that nearly 26,000 charges have been issued against drivers using Lendal Bridge, I have to say that there must be something wrong somewhere. I would like to know if there is anyway that the CoYC and in particular Councillor Alexander as leader, be held to account and explain why the number of drivers has reached such proportions as I don’t believe that 26,000 drivers can all be wrong, in fact the figure is obscene. Igiveinthen
  • Score: 33

12:32pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Helairmike1 says...

We were planning on visiting York for the Christmas Fayre at the end of November but frankly with the the anti visitor approach that the council appears to be taking with exploitation through fines ie Lendal Bridge we have decided to visit Bath instead. We have loved visiting York in the past but I think the Council is making the city less attractive with it's Draconian Measures - Looks like a good fleecing of residents and visitors to top up the Council Coffers.
I agree with other Posts Canterbury Manage very well as do Bath with Traffic
We were planning on visiting York for the Christmas Fayre at the end of November but frankly with the the anti visitor approach that the council appears to be taking with exploitation through fines ie Lendal Bridge we have decided to visit Bath instead. We have loved visiting York in the past but I think the Council is making the city less attractive with it's Draconian Measures - Looks like a good fleecing of residents and visitors to top up the Council Coffers. I agree with other Posts Canterbury Manage very well as do Bath with Traffic Helairmike1
  • Score: 27

12:35pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Mulgrave says...

Igiveinthen wrote:
Having read all the comments regarding the admittance by the CoYC that nearly 26,000 charges have been issued against drivers using Lendal Bridge, I have to say that there must be something wrong somewhere.
I would like to know if there is anyway that the CoYC and in particular Councillor Alexander as leader, be held to account and explain why the number of drivers has reached such proportions as I don’t believe that 26,000 drivers can all be wrong, in fact the figure is obscene.
If they had placed an order for the actual traffic sign it all hinges on, the red bordered depiction of a car and motorbike, to be produced in an illuminated LED version when the problem became obvious, it could be up an running now. These are ideal for special situations like this, and at some point the council will have to account for why it chose not to use one, the defence of "It was only a six month trial" will make then look a little silly when the fines will have reached a couple of million pounds by the end of the period.

Apart from that it can be argued that the trial has not been robust as the unauthorised traffic using the bridge could be the tipping point which resulted in complete gridlock on some of the alternative routes.
[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: Having read all the comments regarding the admittance by the CoYC that nearly 26,000 charges have been issued against drivers using Lendal Bridge, I have to say that there must be something wrong somewhere. I would like to know if there is anyway that the CoYC and in particular Councillor Alexander as leader, be held to account and explain why the number of drivers has reached such proportions as I don’t believe that 26,000 drivers can all be wrong, in fact the figure is obscene.[/p][/quote]If they had placed an order for the actual traffic sign it all hinges on, the red bordered depiction of a car and motorbike, to be produced in an illuminated LED version when the problem became obvious, it could be up an running now. These are ideal for special situations like this, and at some point the council will have to account for why it chose not to use one, the defence of "It was only a six month trial" will make then look a little silly when the fines will have reached a couple of million pounds by the end of the period. Apart from that it can be argued that the trial has not been robust as the unauthorised traffic using the bridge could be the tipping point which resulted in complete gridlock on some of the alternative routes. Mulgrave
  • Score: 11

12:55pm Wed 20 Nov 13

the original Homer says...

Just Passing wrote:
What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.
26000 motorists got to the signs on the bridge and went across. You want them to read the signs and not cross??

That wil mean many of them stopping to read and digest the detail, then deciding what the alternative is, and then checking to see if that manoeuvre is safe.

So, that causes more congestion, more emissions, more delays to P&R buses, and no revenue from fines.

If 26000 get as far as the bridge then the damage is done. It makes no difference whether they then cross or not - the scheme is a failure.
[quote][p][bold]Just Passing[/bold] wrote: What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.[/p][/quote]26000 motorists got to the signs on the bridge and went across. You want them to read the signs and not cross?? That wil mean many of them stopping to read and digest the detail, then deciding what the alternative is, and then checking to see if that manoeuvre is safe. So, that causes more congestion, more emissions, more delays to P&R buses, and no revenue from fines. If 26000 get as far as the bridge then the damage is done. It makes no difference whether they then cross or not - the scheme is a failure. the original Homer
  • Score: 25

1:03pm Wed 20 Nov 13

the original Homer says...

Just Passing wrote:
What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.
26000 crossed the bridge and were fined. You think they should have got to the bridge, seen the signs that mattered and not crossed???

That would mean 26000 drivers stopping to fully read and digest the meaning of the signs, then work out what the alternative is, and then check that taking the alternative route is a safe manoeuvre.

Meanwhile the traffic sits behind and waits. More congestion, more emissions, more dealys to P&R buses, and no reveenue from fines.

If 26000 get as far as the bridge then the scheme is a failure. It is fairly irrelevent whether or not they actually cross the bridge - the damage is done.
[quote][p][bold]Just Passing[/bold] wrote: What is all the fuss about signage? There are plenty of pros and cons to the bridge closure trial but the signage is a red herring. Motorists only need to see one sign - the one saying no vehicles between times - to know that they are not allowed to use the bridge. It is no different to any other restriction you come across elsewhere. The other signs provide information which may help with awareness and re-planning but ultimately it is the signs on the bridge that should stop motorists crossing it. If they fail to see it or choose to ignore it they only have themselves to blame when fined. Water Lane / Water End is a nightmare between 4pm and 6.30pm but much of this could be reduced if Bootham and St Peters school encouraged their pupils (and parents) to use the P+R to Rawcliffe instead of sitting in their gas guzzling 4x4. Time for a congestion charge inside the ring road for non-residents.[/p][/quote]26000 crossed the bridge and were fined. You think they should have got to the bridge, seen the signs that mattered and not crossed??? That would mean 26000 drivers stopping to fully read and digest the meaning of the signs, then work out what the alternative is, and then check that taking the alternative route is a safe manoeuvre. Meanwhile the traffic sits behind and waits. More congestion, more emissions, more dealys to P&R buses, and no reveenue from fines. If 26000 get as far as the bridge then the scheme is a failure. It is fairly irrelevent whether or not they actually cross the bridge - the damage is done. the original Homer
  • Score: 17

1:05pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

Still waiting for the results of our re- appeal.

I've read all your comments with great interest and although I'm not from York I support York residents right to have the freedom of their own city.

Please support the epetition on the say no to lendal bridge close on the Facebook page.

Only 91 have signed so far. We are trying to support you who live there and are struggling with the increased traffic on other routes or have increased journeys because you cannot use the bridge or the traders who are just struggling.

Please support us who have been fined , in some cases many times by showing your support on the above Facebook page and writing to your council and signing the epetition.

Not everyone can cycle, not everyone can use park and ride. P,ease remember that.
Still waiting for the results of our re- appeal. I've read all your comments with great interest and although I'm not from York I support York residents right to have the freedom of their own city. Please support the epetition on the say no to lendal bridge close on the Facebook page. Only 91 have signed so far. We are trying to support you who live there and are struggling with the increased traffic on other routes or have increased journeys because you cannot use the bridge or the traders who are just struggling. Please support us who have been fined , in some cases many times by showing your support on the above Facebook page and writing to your council and signing the epetition. Not everyone can cycle, not everyone can use park and ride. P,ease remember that. Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 25

1:40pm Wed 20 Nov 13

chelk says...

mjgyork wrote:
Dazmond wrote:
shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.
I repeat something which should be obvious: there is NO destination in York which can only be reached by crossing Lendal Bridge. Presumably the driver does not have dementia?
You should read Shebear's original post before you comment she was suggesting people get out of their cars. You have obviously never tried to get a person suffering with Dementia and all the items needed onto a cycle as well as yourself.
[quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dazmond[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.[/p][/quote]I repeat something which should be obvious: there is NO destination in York which can only be reached by crossing Lendal Bridge. Presumably the driver does not have dementia?[/p][/quote]You should read Shebear's original post before you comment she was suggesting people get out of their cars. You have obviously never tried to get a person suffering with Dementia and all the items needed onto a cycle as well as yourself. chelk
  • Score: 21

2:31pm Wed 20 Nov 13

MorkofYork says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
I would support anyone who chooses to cycle, walk or use the bus that is their own choice. We also have many who choose to use a car. So why is it that the anti car people think they an tell others who choose to use a car that they should not? As I have said before, just think if we had a change of thinking in this country and someone decided that we should encourage modal change in favour of the car and then started to implement measures making cycling very difficult, expensive and time consuming giving priority to cars and making sure that cycle journeys took twice as long or at times down right impossible. I am sure that people who choose to cycle would be up in arms. I for one would support them because this is supposed to be a free country and I see no reason for one section of society to be singled out and bullied in this way. I used to cycle quite a lot but when I advanced in my career and started working some 60 to 70 hours a week a long tiring cycle home became less attractive and I would choose to use the car. Then the council decided that they would try to make me use a bike or bus bullying and harassing me by making my car journey much longer and frustrating. That is when I abandoned the bike altogether my reasoning being that if you give in to bullies you are asking for more trouble. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the bridge signage, I don't know because I don't use the bridge, is this closure not just another direct attack on residents who choose to use cars. The council know that there will be more congestion elsewhere particularly in residential areas, you know those places where people live and don't have a choice about breathing in the council create pollution. The denial of the extra congestion created should not come as a surprise this trail is going to be a success and it already is being judged as such by the council. Lets face it in the eyes of the council - Less traffic on Lendal Bridge - success, Less pollution on Lendal Bridge - success. Doubling of journey times by car - success.
You will note that they say traffic patters are still settling down. What they mean by this is you are getting conditioned to the longer journey times and will stop opposing them if they keep this up for long enough. They used the same tactic in Scarborough - "give it six months to see how it goes as the traffic settles down" they told the residents who were enraged by the sudden overnight change when all the new traffic lights were switched on and their town seemed to be gridlocked but with no extra car journeys. Sure enough six months later no one was complaining anymore just sitting in queues for hours that they did not need to be in and who gets the blame for that people who choose to use cars.
I for one am glad to see that people still feel strongly about this and keep trying to make themselves heard by a council who do not want to listen.
One final tip. Wherever possible use a major bus route for your car journey. Don't sit on the outer ring road in the council created congestion turn into town at the first P&R route you pass, no better still, go out of your way to do so and stick to routes used by busses. As you know big brother is watching and if a bus is being held up they will alter the lights to try to shorten the bus journey time if you are on the same road you will benefit too. You may have to travel further but you will get there quicker.
Thank you, someone who gets it. They're trying to create world Anna and Merrett and they want everyone to be forced to do what they want them to do.
People should have a right to live free from this kind of manipulation, how are they not fascists ?

For people not wanting to vote, i think spoiling the paper is the new 'none of the above, so that's probably the best option.

I haven't changed my journeys much at all, sometimes i go over Clifton bridge. I go through town to get to Monks cross.
I won't be bullied by some stuffy councillors.
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: I would support anyone who chooses to cycle, walk or use the bus that is their own choice. We also have many who choose to use a car. So why is it that the anti car people think they an tell others who choose to use a car that they should not? As I have said before, just think if we had a change of thinking in this country and someone decided that we should encourage modal change in favour of the car and then started to implement measures making cycling very difficult, expensive and time consuming giving priority to cars and making sure that cycle journeys took twice as long or at times down right impossible. I am sure that people who choose to cycle would be up in arms. I for one would support them because this is supposed to be a free country and I see no reason for one section of society to be singled out and bullied in this way. I used to cycle quite a lot but when I advanced in my career and started working some 60 to 70 hours a week a long tiring cycle home became less attractive and I would choose to use the car. Then the council decided that they would try to make me use a bike or bus bullying and harassing me by making my car journey much longer and frustrating. That is when I abandoned the bike altogether my reasoning being that if you give in to bullies you are asking for more trouble. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the bridge signage, I don't know because I don't use the bridge, is this closure not just another direct attack on residents who choose to use cars. The council know that there will be more congestion elsewhere particularly in residential areas, you know those places where people live and don't have a choice about breathing in the council create pollution. The denial of the extra congestion created should not come as a surprise this trail is going to be a success and it already is being judged as such by the council. Lets face it in the eyes of the council - Less traffic on Lendal Bridge - success, Less pollution on Lendal Bridge - success. Doubling of journey times by car - success. You will note that they say traffic patters are still settling down. What they mean by this is you are getting conditioned to the longer journey times and will stop opposing them if they keep this up for long enough. They used the same tactic in Scarborough - "give it six months to see how it goes as the traffic settles down" they told the residents who were enraged by the sudden overnight change when all the new traffic lights were switched on and their town seemed to be gridlocked but with no extra car journeys. Sure enough six months later no one was complaining anymore just sitting in queues for hours that they did not need to be in and who gets the blame for that people who choose to use cars. I for one am glad to see that people still feel strongly about this and keep trying to make themselves heard by a council who do not want to listen. One final tip. Wherever possible use a major bus route for your car journey. Don't sit on the outer ring road in the council created congestion turn into town at the first P&R route you pass, no better still, go out of your way to do so and stick to routes used by busses. As you know big brother is watching and if a bus is being held up they will alter the lights to try to shorten the bus journey time if you are on the same road you will benefit too. You may have to travel further but you will get there quicker.[/p][/quote]Thank you, someone who gets it. They're trying to create world Anna and Merrett and they want everyone to be forced to do what they want them to do. People should have a right to live free from this kind of manipulation, how are they not fascists ? For people not wanting to vote, i think spoiling the paper is the new 'none of the above, so that's probably the best option. I haven't changed my journeys much at all, sometimes i go over Clifton bridge. I go through town to get to Monks cross. I won't be bullied by some stuffy councillors. MorkofYork
  • Score: 17

2:49pm Wed 20 Nov 13

arg says...

mjgyork wrote:
Dazmond wrote:
shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.
I repeat something which should be obvious: there is NO destination in York which can only be reached by crossing Lendal Bridge. Presumably the driver does not have dementia?
There are many disabled who find both car and bus rides to be extremely painful and forcing them to chose between a herky jerky bus or a 45 minute extended trip around the nether regions of York to replace what was once a 10 minute car trip is unconscionable. Add to the fact that disabled folk have other issues that mitigate against long car journeys this closure makes parts of York inaccessible to many disabled people including the shiny new Council Offices where they have to go to file their appeal or the Railway Station. The bridge closure effectively imprisons these people in their homes - a good trick for a socialist administration.
[quote][p][bold]mjgyork[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dazmond[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]My dad has dementia and is also disabled, due to the amount of stuff he needs with him my mum needs to use the car to take him places. Think before you open your mouth and be thankful your body is in a condition that allows you to use a bike you arrogant selfish moron.[/p][/quote]I repeat something which should be obvious: there is NO destination in York which can only be reached by crossing Lendal Bridge. Presumably the driver does not have dementia?[/p][/quote]There are many disabled who find both car and bus rides to be extremely painful and forcing them to chose between a herky jerky bus or a 45 minute extended trip around the nether regions of York to replace what was once a 10 minute car trip is unconscionable. Add to the fact that disabled folk have other issues that mitigate against long car journeys this closure makes parts of York inaccessible to many disabled people including the shiny new Council Offices where they have to go to file their appeal or the Railway Station. The bridge closure effectively imprisons these people in their homes - a good trick for a socialist administration. arg
  • Score: 16

2:52pm Wed 20 Nov 13

bloodaxe says...

Load of tired old clichés. Antiquated thinking for an ancient city. Yesterday the report was of hotel occupancy rates recovering well from Olympic downturn year. A walk through the city shows it to be as crowded as ever and yet we're told that footfall is down and businesses are complaining. York has rarely looked and felt better than it does today. Traffic management in the centre has been awful for years, with private cars allowed to do almost whatever they want. Time to close the centre to private vehicles for one day every week; as for increased congestion round the city, possibly at peak times but the bridge is open anyway up to 10.30 and for early evening rush. Getting round the inner ring is pretty easy I find during the day. Rating for this post ? About minus 56 I'd guess.
Load of tired old clichés. Antiquated thinking for an ancient city. Yesterday the report was of hotel occupancy rates recovering well from Olympic downturn year. A walk through the city shows it to be as crowded as ever and yet we're told that footfall is down and businesses are complaining. York has rarely looked and felt better than it does today. Traffic management in the centre has been awful for years, with private cars allowed to do almost whatever they want. Time to close the centre to private vehicles for one day every week; as for increased congestion round the city, possibly at peak times but the bridge is open anyway up to 10.30 and for early evening rush. Getting round the inner ring is pretty easy I find during the day. Rating for this post ? About minus 56 I'd guess. bloodaxe
  • Score: -27

3:01pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Alf Garnett says...

As there are more car parks round the central area than most people have had hot dinners and that it takes no more than fifteen minutes to walk to any part of the central area from any one of those car parks, for the vast majority of people this should not present a problem. Looking at the obesity stats for the UK, making driving less of an option in urban areas ought to be a good thing. As for journeys taking a few minutes longer, well possibly at certain times but one isn't obliged to do this unprotected from the elements so it isn't as if it was real hardship. We're just a load of softies. Come on York, wake up and join the 21st century !
As there are more car parks round the central area than most people have had hot dinners and that it takes no more than fifteen minutes to walk to any part of the central area from any one of those car parks, for the vast majority of people this should not present a problem. Looking at the obesity stats for the UK, making driving less of an option in urban areas ought to be a good thing. As for journeys taking a few minutes longer, well possibly at certain times but one isn't obliged to do this unprotected from the elements so it isn't as if it was real hardship. We're just a load of softies. Come on York, wake up and join the 21st century ! Alf Garnett
  • Score: -25

3:02pm Wed 20 Nov 13

inthesticks says...

led balls wrote:
shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
tw@
Looks like a certain Cllr has logged in on a different ISP! Patronising tone and contempt for the public just can`t be disguised.
[quote][p][bold]led balls[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]tw@[/p][/quote]Looks like a certain Cllr has logged in on a different ISP! Patronising tone and contempt for the public just can`t be disguised. inthesticks
  • Score: 20

3:10pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Alf Garnett says...

Dontfleecethetourist
s
wrote:
Still waiting for the results of our re- appeal.

I've read all your comments with great interest and although I'm not from York I support York residents right to have the freedom of their own city.

Please support the epetition on the say no to lendal bridge close on the Facebook page.

Only 91 have signed so far. We are trying to support you who live there and are struggling with the increased traffic on other routes or have increased journeys because you cannot use the bridge or the traders who are just struggling.

Please support us who have been fined , in some cases many times by showing your support on the above Facebook page and writing to your council and signing the epetition.

Not everyone can cycle, not everyone can use park and ride. P,ease remember that.
Which other cities have you visited recently ? Several cities have similar restrictions and bus-only streets with camera surveillance. We have our freedom thanks, the freedom to cross the road without being carved up and to enjoy cleaner air. As for being fined, well there are plenty of signs telling you that the bridge is closed. I was fined recently in a UK city but I only had myself to blame and I paid up. I certainly don't blame that particular city and I've been back since.
[quote][p][bold]Dontfleecethetourist s[/bold] wrote: Still waiting for the results of our re- appeal. I've read all your comments with great interest and although I'm not from York I support York residents right to have the freedom of their own city. Please support the epetition on the say no to lendal bridge close on the Facebook page. Only 91 have signed so far. We are trying to support you who live there and are struggling with the increased traffic on other routes or have increased journeys because you cannot use the bridge or the traders who are just struggling. Please support us who have been fined , in some cases many times by showing your support on the above Facebook page and writing to your council and signing the epetition. Not everyone can cycle, not everyone can use park and ride. P,ease remember that.[/p][/quote]Which other cities have you visited recently ? Several cities have similar restrictions and bus-only streets with camera surveillance. We have our freedom thanks, the freedom to cross the road without being carved up and to enjoy cleaner air. As for being fined, well there are plenty of signs telling you that the bridge is closed. I was fined recently in a UK city but I only had myself to blame and I paid up. I certainly don't blame that particular city and I've been back since. Alf Garnett
  • Score: -29

3:24pm Wed 20 Nov 13

asd says...

For people that direct question me and get personal and I give a response. dont in future because you cry like a baby to mod if you dont like the answer back well dont ask the qusetion then. Maybe I should copy your classy example, I know who it is too.
For people that direct question me and get personal and I give a response. dont in future because you cry like a baby to mod if you dont like the answer back well dont ask the qusetion then. Maybe I should copy your classy example, I know who it is too. asd
  • Score: -11

3:33pm Wed 20 Nov 13

JasBro says...

Alf Garnett wrote:
As there are more car parks round the central area than most people have had hot dinners and that it takes no more than fifteen minutes to walk to any part of the central area from any one of those car parks, for the vast majority of people this should not present a problem. Looking at the obesity stats for the UK, making driving less of an option in urban areas ought to be a good thing. As for journeys taking a few minutes longer, well possibly at certain times but one isn't obliged to do this unprotected from the elements so it isn't as if it was real hardship. We're just a load of softies. Come on York, wake up and join the 21st century !
Some fair points, but the bridge is a main access route to the railway station from many parts of York, and journeys are taking more than a few minutes longer, some are taking half an hour or more longer. The extra traffic, congestion and pollution that creates has been shifted to residential areas.

If it 's really such a good idea, why was it never presented at election time?
[quote][p][bold]Alf Garnett[/bold] wrote: As there are more car parks round the central area than most people have had hot dinners and that it takes no more than fifteen minutes to walk to any part of the central area from any one of those car parks, for the vast majority of people this should not present a problem. Looking at the obesity stats for the UK, making driving less of an option in urban areas ought to be a good thing. As for journeys taking a few minutes longer, well possibly at certain times but one isn't obliged to do this unprotected from the elements so it isn't as if it was real hardship. We're just a load of softies. Come on York, wake up and join the 21st century ![/p][/quote]Some fair points, but the bridge is a main access route to the railway station from many parts of York, and journeys are taking more than a few minutes longer, some are taking half an hour or more longer. The extra traffic, congestion and pollution that creates has been shifted to residential areas. If it 's really such a good idea, why was it never presented at election time? JasBro
  • Score: 27

3:41pm Wed 20 Nov 13

24.2.1969bestcitygoalever... says...

The real future (20/30 years on) of York has to be:

1. A proper, 'all-the-way-round' bypass - the western 'non-bypass' bypass bit brings me out in a cold sweat as regards how much time I am going to be on it. It's always a 'judgment call' to get round the 'left hand half' expeditiously and it shouldn't be. At times the 'stop-go' puts me off using it.

2. The roads that the bypass leads to out of and towards the city, apart from the A64 to Tadcaster, are not very efficient. This determines where I choose to go & not go from York and it shouldn't.

3. In reality it does amaze me that you still have massive traffic flows over three old bridges into and around what is still a medieval city whose shape isn't ever going to change.

4. Over the next 20/30 years you might even need another TWO bridges & then only use the current 3 for buses, taxis, special access for those who need it etc.
The real future (20/30 years on) of York has to be: 1. A proper, 'all-the-way-round' bypass - the western 'non-bypass' bypass bit brings me out in a cold sweat as regards how much time I am going to be on it. It's always a 'judgment call' to get round the 'left hand half' expeditiously and it shouldn't be. At times the 'stop-go' puts me off using it. 2. The roads that the bypass leads to out of and towards the city, apart from the A64 to Tadcaster, are not very efficient. This determines where I choose to go & not go from York and it shouldn't. 3. In reality it does amaze me that you still have massive traffic flows over three old bridges into and around what is still a medieval city whose shape isn't ever going to change. 4. Over the next 20/30 years you might even need another TWO bridges & then only use the current 3 for buses, taxis, special access for those who need it etc. 24.2.1969bestcitygoalever...
  • Score: 12

4:05pm Wed 20 Nov 13

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Coun Andy D'Agorne, who leads the council's Green group, said:
" I would like to see the council including air quality data in these reports."

No doubt they will be eager to oblige, it is no coincidence that the trial has been carried out at the time of year when greater rain fall and increased wind speed will disperse airborne pollution enabling more favourable results.

Maybe you would be interested in the air quality of Leeman Road on a summers day in July, but then again that would be counter to your aims. The fact is you couldn't care less about the residents and after all you can blame drivers.

Misinform yourselves and make a big deal of your contrived success but don't expect everyone to be convinced. This is a malicious trial that would not stand up to scrutiny which is why it is managed in secrecy and implemented by stealth.
Coun Andy D'Agorne, who leads the council's Green group, said: " I would like to see the council including air quality data in these reports." No doubt they will be eager to oblige, it is no coincidence that the trial has been carried out at the time of year when greater rain fall and increased wind speed will disperse airborne pollution enabling more favourable results. Maybe you would be interested in the air quality of Leeman Road on a summers day in July, but then again that would be counter to your aims. The fact is you couldn't care less about the residents and after all you can blame drivers. Misinform yourselves and make a big deal of your contrived success but don't expect everyone to be convinced. This is a malicious trial that would not stand up to scrutiny which is why it is managed in secrecy and implemented by stealth. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 18

4:23pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Mulgrave says...

24.2.1969bestcitygoa
lever...
wrote:
The real future (20/30 years on) of York has to be:

1. A proper, 'all-the-way-round' bypass - the western 'non-bypass' bypass bit brings me out in a cold sweat as regards how much time I am going to be on it. It's always a 'judgment call' to get round the 'left hand half' expeditiously and it shouldn't be. At times the 'stop-go' puts me off using it.

2. The roads that the bypass leads to out of and towards the city, apart from the A64 to Tadcaster, are not very efficient. This determines where I choose to go & not go from York and it shouldn't.

3. In reality it does amaze me that you still have massive traffic flows over three old bridges into and around what is still a medieval city whose shape isn't ever going to change.

4. Over the next 20/30 years you might even need another TWO bridges & then only use the current 3 for buses, taxis, special access for those who need it etc.
I hope we won't still be pretending taxis aren't cars in 20/30 years, like Coun Merrett does when he is being chauffeured in one. The use that a car is being put to is the intelligent approach not what it says on the V5c registration document.
[quote][p][bold]24.2.1969bestcitygoa lever...[/bold] wrote: The real future (20/30 years on) of York has to be: 1. A proper, 'all-the-way-round' bypass - the western 'non-bypass' bypass bit brings me out in a cold sweat as regards how much time I am going to be on it. It's always a 'judgment call' to get round the 'left hand half' expeditiously and it shouldn't be. At times the 'stop-go' puts me off using it. 2. The roads that the bypass leads to out of and towards the city, apart from the A64 to Tadcaster, are not very efficient. This determines where I choose to go & not go from York and it shouldn't. 3. In reality it does amaze me that you still have massive traffic flows over three old bridges into and around what is still a medieval city whose shape isn't ever going to change. 4. Over the next 20/30 years you might even need another TWO bridges & then only use the current 3 for buses, taxis, special access for those who need it etc.[/p][/quote]I hope we won't still be pretending taxis aren't cars in 20/30 years, like Coun Merrett does when he is being chauffeured in one. The use that a car is being put to is the intelligent approach not what it says on the V5c registration document. Mulgrave
  • Score: 16

5:32pm Wed 20 Nov 13

meme says...

what is clear is that whether the closure of the bridge is right or wrong in the long term something is wrong if that many drivers are missing/ignoring the signs.
this could do irreparable harm to our lifeblood...the tourist trade and CoYC need to get it right
They have had the idea and they must ensure that the restriction is clear
Why not put rising bollards activated by taxis and busses paid for with the fine money so this situation does not continue then no one will be fined and the situation rectified or stop the trial until a clear way of ensuring unsuspecting yet law abiding strangers don't get fined at all
I actually support the closure in principle but not at the expense of damaging the cities reputation
SO SORT IT COYC OR GIVE IT UP UNTIL YOU CAN SORT IT
what is clear is that whether the closure of the bridge is right or wrong in the long term something is wrong if that many drivers are missing/ignoring the signs. this could do irreparable harm to our lifeblood...the tourist trade and CoYC need to get it right They have had the idea and they must ensure that the restriction is clear Why not put rising bollards activated by taxis and busses paid for with the fine money so this situation does not continue then no one will be fined and the situation rectified or stop the trial until a clear way of ensuring unsuspecting yet law abiding strangers don't get fined at all I actually support the closure in principle but not at the expense of damaging the cities reputation SO SORT IT COYC OR GIVE IT UP UNTIL YOU CAN SORT IT meme
  • Score: 7

6:06pm Wed 20 Nov 13

JHardacre says...

Alf Garnett wrote:
Dontfleecethetourist

s
wrote:
Still waiting for the results of our re- appeal.

I've read all your comments with great interest and although I'm not from York I support York residents right to have the freedom of their own city.

Please support the epetition on the say no to lendal bridge close on the Facebook page.

Only 91 have signed so far. We are trying to support you who live there and are struggling with the increased traffic on other routes or have increased journeys because you cannot use the bridge or the traders who are just struggling.

Please support us who have been fined , in some cases many times by showing your support on the above Facebook page and writing to your council and signing the epetition.

Not everyone can cycle, not everyone can use park and ride. P,ease remember that.
Which other cities have you visited recently ? Several cities have similar restrictions and bus-only streets with camera surveillance. We have our freedom thanks, the freedom to cross the road without being carved up and to enjoy cleaner air. As for being fined, well there are plenty of signs telling you that the bridge is closed. I was fined recently in a UK city but I only had myself to blame and I paid up. I certainly don't blame that particular city and I've been back since.
" there are plenty of signs telling you that the bridge is closed."

Are there? All the ones I have seen say that traffic is 'Restricted' which means b* all.
[quote][p][bold]Alf Garnett[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dontfleecethetourist s[/bold] wrote: Still waiting for the results of our re- appeal. I've read all your comments with great interest and although I'm not from York I support York residents right to have the freedom of their own city. Please support the epetition on the say no to lendal bridge close on the Facebook page. Only 91 have signed so far. We are trying to support you who live there and are struggling with the increased traffic on other routes or have increased journeys because you cannot use the bridge or the traders who are just struggling. Please support us who have been fined , in some cases many times by showing your support on the above Facebook page and writing to your council and signing the epetition. Not everyone can cycle, not everyone can use park and ride. P,ease remember that.[/p][/quote]Which other cities have you visited recently ? Several cities have similar restrictions and bus-only streets with camera surveillance. We have our freedom thanks, the freedom to cross the road without being carved up and to enjoy cleaner air. As for being fined, well there are plenty of signs telling you that the bridge is closed. I was fined recently in a UK city but I only had myself to blame and I paid up. I certainly don't blame that particular city and I've been back since.[/p][/quote]" there are plenty of signs telling you that the bridge is closed." Are there? All the ones I have seen say that traffic is 'Restricted' which means b* all. JHardacre
  • Score: 15

6:21pm Wed 20 Nov 13

wallman says...

Digeorge wrote:
It is raising money for the new bridge to be built!
which will not be open long to traffic
[quote][p][bold]Digeorge[/bold] wrote: It is raising money for the new bridge to be built![/p][/quote]which will not be open long to traffic wallman
  • Score: 8

7:13pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Graham Dobbs says...

VINNIE J wrote:
yorkie76 wrote: The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.
Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.
When you are not from York it very confusing, do you want tourists?
[quote][p][bold]VINNIE J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.[/p][/quote]Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.[/p][/quote]When you are not from York it very confusing, do you want tourists? Graham Dobbs
  • Score: 7

7:14pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Graham Dobbs says...

VINNIE J wrote:
yorkie76 wrote: The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.
Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.
When you are not from York it very confusing, do you want tourists?
[quote][p][bold]VINNIE J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yorkie76[/bold] wrote: The signs do not help, everyday there are drivers confused about the correct route. Then you have taxi drivers beeping their horn after 1 second of hesitation from the driver in front. The people that take a wrong turning need to have a place where they can turn around without the impatience of taxi/bus drivers making the decision more stressful. However, we need to admit it, the council have used this as a cash cow. It is the only thing that makes sense in my opinion. All it will do is drive people away form York as it will get a name for itself if they keep this up.[/p][/quote]Yes they must be especially confused when coming from the station then getting into a lane clearly marked BUS LANE and signs telling them it is restricted access etc. As well as getting the fine they should be charged with driving with undue care and attention.[/p][/quote]When you are not from York it very confusing, do you want tourists? Graham Dobbs
  • Score: 8

8:44pm Wed 20 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

In response to Alf Garnett I'd just like to say

Let him who has never made a mistake cast the first stone!
In response to Alf Garnett I'd just like to say Let him who has never made a mistake cast the first stone! Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 8

9:18pm Wed 20 Nov 13

ouseswimmer says...

Never forget that in 1918 the Council held a vote to demolish the city walls. It lost by one vote. Councils will always try to do something stupid mostly because they never talk to the people.
Never forget that in 1918 the Council held a vote to demolish the city walls. It lost by one vote. Councils will always try to do something stupid mostly because they never talk to the people. ouseswimmer
  • Score: 17

9:44pm Wed 20 Nov 13

What-a-joke-they-are says...

Dear CoYC

You cannot force change, you can only encourage it,

You can persuade, you cannot bully

You cannot argue with stupid people, you just vote them in to office

I will walk when it suits me,
I will cycle when it suits me,
I will use the bus when it suits me.

However I will use my car as much as I can in the face of being told not to.

Encourage what you want rather than trying to discourage what you don't.

Isn't one of the rules of parenting?

When will you learn? Probably when it's too late for us and you
Dear CoYC You cannot force change, you can only encourage it, You can persuade, you cannot bully You cannot argue with stupid people, you just vote them in to office I will walk when it suits me, I will cycle when it suits me, I will use the bus when it suits me. However I will use my car as much as I can in the face of being told not to. Encourage what you want rather than trying to discourage what you don't. Isn't one of the rules of parenting? When will you learn? Probably when it's too late for us and you What-a-joke-they-are
  • Score: 20

3:54pm Thu 21 Nov 13

arg says...

Alf Garnett wrote:
As there are more car parks round the central area than most people have had hot dinners and that it takes no more than fifteen minutes to walk to any part of the central area from any one of those car parks, for the vast majority of people this should not present a problem. Looking at the obesity stats for the UK, making driving less of an option in urban areas ought to be a good thing. As for journeys taking a few minutes longer, well possibly at certain times but one isn't obliged to do this unprotected from the elements so it isn't as if it was real hardship. We're just a load of softies. Come on York, wake up and join the 21st century !
So speaks one of the Physically enabled!
[quote][p][bold]Alf Garnett[/bold] wrote: As there are more car parks round the central area than most people have had hot dinners and that it takes no more than fifteen minutes to walk to any part of the central area from any one of those car parks, for the vast majority of people this should not present a problem. Looking at the obesity stats for the UK, making driving less of an option in urban areas ought to be a good thing. As for journeys taking a few minutes longer, well possibly at certain times but one isn't obliged to do this unprotected from the elements so it isn't as if it was real hardship. We're just a load of softies. Come on York, wake up and join the 21st century ![/p][/quote]So speaks one of the Physically enabled! arg
  • Score: 9

3:25pm Fri 22 Nov 13

SGavin says...

I have no axe to grind about whether or not Lendal Bridge is pedestrianised. I rarely drive across it - but in October I drove across it from the south side and received a fine. I hadn't ignored the signs, I simply hadn't seen them. I was a case of being too confident - "of knowing where I was going".

When I looked to understand how I had done this, I noticed that the large sign to the left, on the bend, can be masked by a bus.

The signs before the bridge are close to (if not on) a pedestrian crossing, and in the morning have the sun behind them.

When approaching the crossing, one has already committed to crossing the bridge and is concentrating on pedestrians etc. As others have said, there is no retreat.

The writing on the road superficially resembles the stripes of a crossing and so again are 'invisible'.

I paid my fine, I was in the wrong, but later felt aggrieved when very large yellow signs were put up for a cycling event. This is the sort of warning that there needs to be near the bridge. I appealed, but retrospective appeals are not considered.

I do not think that 26,000 + people thought they could afford at least £30 to cross the bridge. I therefore I assume that most people crossed unintentionally.

Setting up a trial is fine, but fines need to be 'trailed' too. A token amount amount should be taken (enough to cover the cost of collection) until the trial is complete and signs and other measures perfected. This way the council can avoid the claim that it is making a 'quick buck' - which it clearly has.
I have no axe to grind about whether or not Lendal Bridge is pedestrianised. I rarely drive across it - but in October I drove across it from the south side and received a fine. I hadn't ignored the signs, I simply hadn't seen them. I was a case of being too confident - "of knowing where I was going". When I looked to understand how I had done this, I noticed that the large sign to the left, on the bend, can be masked by a bus. The signs before the bridge are close to (if not on) a pedestrian crossing, and in the morning have the sun behind them. When approaching the crossing, one has already committed to crossing the bridge and is concentrating on pedestrians etc. As others have said, there is no retreat. The writing on the road superficially resembles the stripes of a crossing and so again are 'invisible'. I paid my fine, I was in the wrong, but later felt aggrieved when very large yellow signs were put up for a cycling event. This is the sort of warning that there needs to be near the bridge. I appealed, but retrospective appeals are not considered. I do not think that 26,000 + people thought they could afford at least £30 to cross the bridge. I therefore I assume that most people crossed unintentionally. Setting up a trial is fine, but fines need to be 'trailed' too. A token amount amount should be taken (enough to cover the cost of collection) until the trial is complete and signs and other measures perfected. This way the council can avoid the claim that it is making a 'quick buck' - which it clearly has. SGavin
  • Score: 11

4:58pm Fri 22 Nov 13

mmarshal says...

Why cannot CYC use clear No Entry and Road Ahead Closed signs (with an exclusion for local buses and taxis).
The signs on A19 at Clifton and on the approach to Bootham Bar are inadequate. The 'NEW' signs at Clifton still refer to Restricted Access; why not CLOSED?
The signs on the approach at Bootham are variously misleading. The large sign before the junction shows that the road ahead is closed (the road ahead is High Petergate); unless you know what and where Lendal Bridge is there's no indication of restrictions to the right (St Leonards Place/Museum Street). The recent small AA yellow signs on the fencing on the junction are only visible to the first car waiting at the junction. They are also not legally effective and enforceable road signs. Finally, there's the sign outside the Theatre Royal, still obscured by buses after 3 months.
Only when the visitor actually arrives on Museum Street do the signs become less ambiguous.
Please CYC, use CLOSED and NO ENTRY signs and - importantly - let visitors know what and where is Lendal Bridge.
If anybody knows how, please get this fiasco into the national forum. Clearly, the local forum is being ignored.
Why cannot CYC use clear No Entry and Road Ahead Closed signs (with an exclusion for local buses and taxis). The signs on A19 at Clifton and on the approach to Bootham Bar are inadequate. The 'NEW' signs at Clifton still refer to Restricted Access; why not CLOSED? The signs on the approach at Bootham are variously misleading. The large sign before the junction shows that the road ahead is closed (the road ahead is High Petergate); unless you know what and where Lendal Bridge is there's no indication of restrictions to the right (St Leonards Place/Museum Street). The recent small AA yellow signs on the fencing on the junction are only visible to the first car waiting at the junction. They are also not legally effective and enforceable road signs. Finally, there's the sign outside the Theatre Royal, still obscured by buses after 3 months. Only when the visitor actually arrives on Museum Street do the signs become less ambiguous. Please CYC, use CLOSED and NO ENTRY signs and - importantly - let visitors know what and where is Lendal Bridge. If anybody knows how, please get this fiasco into the national forum. Clearly, the local forum is being ignored. mmarshal
  • Score: 11

5:29pm Fri 22 Nov 13

SGavin says...

Thank you mmarshal. A very thorough summary.
Thank you mmarshal. A very thorough summary. SGavin
  • Score: 1

7:05pm Fri 22 Nov 13

Digeorge says...

Dear York Press

Do we really have to 'subscribe' to an article when posting as seems to be the case now as you tend to have 100 e-mails in your in box on the topic that you posted about! Not that I really want them as they go in the trash box.

I am sure I am not the only one here that has been inundated with e-mails this week!!
Dear York Press Do we really have to 'subscribe' to an article when posting as seems to be the case now as you tend to have 100 e-mails in your in box on the topic that you posted about! Not that I really want them as they go in the trash box. I am sure I am not the only one here that has been inundated with e-mails this week!! Digeorge
  • Score: -2

11:31pm Fri 22 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

We have some good news. When our appeal was turned down we had a choice of paying £30 or taking it to tribunal. If we failed a second time the fine went to £60.

After a seconds discussion we decided to take it to another level. So strongly did we feel that this was an unfair and particularly harsh and cruel penalty. I mean hands up those who have NEVER mad a mistake when driving .

Well we have learned that we have been successful.

THE COUNCIL HAVE DECIDED NOT TO CONTEST IT!

I hope this opens the floodgates for everyone else, especially people who ended up with several PCNs.

I actually hope what the council are doing is illegal. I would love a barrister to get caught just so that she/ he could have their day in court!

Good luck to anyone who is going through the process!
We have some good news. When our appeal was turned down we had a choice of paying £30 or taking it to tribunal. If we failed a second time the fine went to £60. After a seconds discussion we decided to take it to another level. So strongly did we feel that this was an unfair and particularly harsh and cruel penalty. I mean hands up those who have NEVER mad a mistake when driving . Well we have learned that we have been successful. THE COUNCIL HAVE DECIDED NOT TO CONTEST IT! I hope this opens the floodgates for everyone else, especially people who ended up with several PCNs. I actually hope what the council are doing is illegal. I would love a barrister to get caught just so that she/ he could have their day in court! Good luck to anyone who is going through the process! Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 13

1:58pm Sat 23 Nov 13

wallman says...

shebear wrote:
How many of you went to the recently held local drop-in sessions to have your say on how the council allocates its budgets - your council tax?
I went but wont be holding my breath After I suggested that all councillors take a reduction in their expense this coming year to help out
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: How many of you went to the recently held local drop-in sessions to have your say on how the council allocates its budgets - your council tax?[/p][/quote]I went but wont be holding my breath After I suggested that all councillors take a reduction in their expense this coming year to help out wallman
  • Score: 5

2:43pm Sat 23 Nov 13

JasBro says...

Dontfleecethetourist
s
wrote:
We have some good news. When our appeal was turned down we had a choice of paying £30 or taking it to tribunal. If we failed a second time the fine went to £60.

After a seconds discussion we decided to take it to another level. So strongly did we feel that this was an unfair and particularly harsh and cruel penalty. I mean hands up those who have NEVER mad a mistake when driving .

Well we have learned that we have been successful.

THE COUNCIL HAVE DECIDED NOT TO CONTEST IT!

I hope this opens the floodgates for everyone else, especially people who ended up with several PCNs.

I actually hope what the council are doing is illegal. I would love a barrister to get caught just so that she/ he could have their day in court!

Good luck to anyone who is going through the process!
Interesting information for anybody that's been fined!
[quote][p][bold]Dontfleecethetourist s[/bold] wrote: We have some good news. When our appeal was turned down we had a choice of paying £30 or taking it to tribunal. If we failed a second time the fine went to £60. After a seconds discussion we decided to take it to another level. So strongly did we feel that this was an unfair and particularly harsh and cruel penalty. I mean hands up those who have NEVER mad a mistake when driving . Well we have learned that we have been successful. THE COUNCIL HAVE DECIDED NOT TO CONTEST IT! I hope this opens the floodgates for everyone else, especially people who ended up with several PCNs. I actually hope what the council are doing is illegal. I would love a barrister to get caught just so that she/ he could have their day in court! Good luck to anyone who is going through the process![/p][/quote]Interesting information for anybody that's been fined! JasBro
  • Score: 8

8:33pm Sat 23 Nov 13

RoseD says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
Able-ist bigot.
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]Able-ist bigot. RoseD
  • Score: 2

8:33pm Sat 23 Nov 13

RoseD says...

shebear wrote:
Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing
Able-ist bigot.
[quote][p][bold]shebear[/bold] wrote: Well done City of York Council for the brave and bold move of restricting access on Lendal Bridge. Also for introducing 20 mph areas in some parts of the city. It's about time the motorists were forced out of their car and made to think about the problems they are stacking up for the city. I want to share the environment with cyclists, pedestrians and car users equitably and safely. Motorists don't have a monopoly on the roads and it's about time they learmed this. We are fortunate in having a wonderful park and ride transport system and in many places segregated cycle lanes. Why do people need to take their cars into the city? Lazy and selfish spring to mind. Get on your bikes and stop wingeing[/p][/quote]Able-ist bigot. RoseD
  • Score: 2

11:28pm Sat 23 Nov 13

Starboard22 says...

As an elderly visitor from Cumbria presented with a £60 Lendal Bridge fine I advise anyone who wants to do any shopping please go to Leeds Harrogate or even the Metro Centre/Newcastle. Where you will not suffer the fate of 26000 plus motorists like I did.

STAY WELL CLEAR OF YORK !!!
As an elderly visitor from Cumbria presented with a £60 Lendal Bridge fine I advise anyone who wants to do any shopping please go to Leeds Harrogate or even the Metro Centre/Newcastle. Where you will not suffer the fate of 26000 plus motorists like I did. STAY WELL CLEAR OF YORK !!! Starboard22
  • Score: 6

8:41am Sun 24 Nov 13

Igiveinthen says...

Starboard22 wrote:
As an elderly visitor from Cumbria presented with a £60 Lendal Bridge fine I advise anyone who wants to do any shopping please go to Leeds Harrogate or even the Metro Centre/Newcastle. Where you will not suffer the fate of 26000 plus motorists like I did.

STAY WELL CLEAR OF YORK !!!
I was born in York, and I have always been proud of the part this city has played in the history of this country, it still is a wonderful city and has many attributes that others don't, but it pains me to read the negative comments from visitors like yourself who either say they won't come back and advise others to avoid it completely - I refer also to the comments on the travel web site Tripadvisor.co.uk - and I hope the City Labour Council officials who have instigated this debacle are proud of the damage they are inflicting on this city in the name of progress i.e. reducing noise and pollution to the residents of the city.
PS if you look on the travel web site you will find a letter from the CoYC explaining and defending their decision to close Lendal Bridge to certain types of traffic during certain hours of the day.
[quote][p][bold]Starboard22[/bold] wrote: As an elderly visitor from Cumbria presented with a £60 Lendal Bridge fine I advise anyone who wants to do any shopping please go to Leeds Harrogate or even the Metro Centre/Newcastle. Where you will not suffer the fate of 26000 plus motorists like I did. STAY WELL CLEAR OF YORK !!![/p][/quote]I was born in York, and I have always been proud of the part this city has played in the history of this country, it still is a wonderful city and has many attributes that others don't, but it pains me to read the negative comments from visitors like yourself who either say they won't come back and advise others to avoid it completely - I refer also to the comments on the travel web site Tripadvisor.co.uk - and I hope the City Labour Council officials who have instigated this debacle are proud of the damage they are inflicting on this city in the name of progress i.e. reducing noise and pollution to the residents of the city. PS if you look on the travel web site you will find a letter from the CoYC explaining and defending their decision to close Lendal Bridge to certain types of traffic during certain hours of the day. Igiveinthen
  • Score: 3

4:04pm Sun 24 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

Starboard 2 ...don't pay! Appeal and if it's overturned reappeal to the independent adjudicator.

YORK COUNCIL DONT APPEAR TO BE CONTESTING THE REAPPEALS

Please go to face book page 'say no to lendal bridge close'
for details of Chris Handleys epetition now up to 119 people and details of photographs and other information to help you with your appeals.

It's the only way forward.
Starboard 2 ...don't pay! Appeal and if it's overturned reappeal to the independent adjudicator. YORK COUNCIL DONT APPEAR TO BE CONTESTING THE REAPPEALS Please go to face book page 'say no to lendal bridge close' for details of Chris Handleys epetition now up to 119 people and details of photographs and other information to help you with your appeals. It's the only way forward. Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 4

4:12pm Sun 24 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

JasBro wrote:
Dontfleecethetourist

s
wrote:
We have some good news. When our appeal was turned down we had a choice of paying £30 or taking it to tribunal. If we failed a second time the fine went to £60.

After a seconds discussion we decided to take it to another level. So strongly did we feel that this was an unfair and particularly harsh and cruel penalty. I mean hands up those who have NEVER mad a mistake when driving .

Well we have learned that we have been successful.

THE COUNCIL HAVE DECIDED NOT TO CONTEST IT!

I hope this opens the floodgates for everyone else, especially people who ended up with several PCNs.

I actually hope what the council are doing is illegal. I would love a barrister to get caught just so that she/ he could have their day in court!

Good luck to anyone who is going through the process!
Interesting information for anybody that's been fined!
I now know of three people who have had their REAPPEALS upheld. These date back to the early days of Sept , so hoping there will be more and this is just the tip of the ice berg.

I hope the floodgates will open as more people use this process.

Don't forget to sign chris handleys epetition on face book page 'say no to lendal ridge close'
I have also written to traffic offence lawyer Jeanette Miller in the hope she will cast her legal eagle eye over what York council is doing to ensure they are operating in a legal manner.

She can only say no, but I feel she will say Yes ....as this is going to be huge.

No City can withstand its trade beeing driven out of its walls, especially by the people who have been entrusted to protect it.

Go for it York. Stand firm! You can beat this!
[quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dontfleecethetourist s[/bold] wrote: We have some good news. When our appeal was turned down we had a choice of paying £30 or taking it to tribunal. If we failed a second time the fine went to £60. After a seconds discussion we decided to take it to another level. So strongly did we feel that this was an unfair and particularly harsh and cruel penalty. I mean hands up those who have NEVER mad a mistake when driving . Well we have learned that we have been successful. THE COUNCIL HAVE DECIDED NOT TO CONTEST IT! I hope this opens the floodgates for everyone else, especially people who ended up with several PCNs. I actually hope what the council are doing is illegal. I would love a barrister to get caught just so that she/ he could have their day in court! Good luck to anyone who is going through the process![/p][/quote]Interesting information for anybody that's been fined![/p][/quote]I now know of three people who have had their REAPPEALS upheld. These date back to the early days of Sept , so hoping there will be more and this is just the tip of the ice berg. I hope the floodgates will open as more people use this process. Don't forget to sign chris handleys epetition on face book page 'say no to lendal ridge close' I have also written to traffic offence lawyer Jeanette Miller in the hope she will cast her legal eagle eye over what York council is doing to ensure they are operating in a legal manner. She can only say no, but I feel she will say Yes ....as this is going to be huge. No City can withstand its trade beeing driven out of its walls, especially by the people who have been entrusted to protect it. Go for it York. Stand firm! You can beat this! Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 5

10:25pm Sun 24 Nov 13

Starboard22 says...

For the life of me I cannot understand how the people of York, a university city could have voted these Labour twerps into power. You have unleashed a monster that you will not be able to control until you kick them out.
Shame on all of you who voted for these morons.
For the life of me I cannot understand how the people of York, a university city could have voted these Labour twerps into power. You have unleashed a monster that you will not be able to control until you kick them out. Shame on all of you who voted for these morons. Starboard22
  • Score: 4

10:53pm Sun 24 Nov 13

Richard Catton says...

mmarshal wrote:
Why cannot CYC use clear No Entry and Road Ahead Closed signs (with an exclusion for local buses and taxis).
The signs on A19 at Clifton and on the approach to Bootham Bar are inadequate. The 'NEW' signs at Clifton still refer to Restricted Access; why not CLOSED?
The signs on the approach at Bootham are variously misleading. The large sign before the junction shows that the road ahead is closed (the road ahead is High Petergate); unless you know what and where Lendal Bridge is there's no indication of restrictions to the right (St Leonards Place/Museum Street). The recent small AA yellow signs on the fencing on the junction are only visible to the first car waiting at the junction. They are also not legally effective and enforceable road signs. Finally, there's the sign outside the Theatre Royal, still obscured by buses after 3 months.
Only when the visitor actually arrives on Museum Street do the signs become less ambiguous.
Please CYC, use CLOSED and NO ENTRY signs and - importantly - let visitors know what and where is Lendal Bridge.
If anybody knows how, please get this fiasco into the national forum. Clearly, the local forum is being ignored.
I agree about getting this problem made national. This regime has now reached such proportions of incompetence in relentlessly pursuing its agenda that it's now time for someone or something, at the higher levels of UK law, to step in
The figures speak for themselves
[quote][p][bold]mmarshal[/bold] wrote: Why cannot CYC use clear No Entry and Road Ahead Closed signs (with an exclusion for local buses and taxis). The signs on A19 at Clifton and on the approach to Bootham Bar are inadequate. The 'NEW' signs at Clifton still refer to Restricted Access; why not CLOSED? The signs on the approach at Bootham are variously misleading. The large sign before the junction shows that the road ahead is closed (the road ahead is High Petergate); unless you know what and where Lendal Bridge is there's no indication of restrictions to the right (St Leonards Place/Museum Street). The recent small AA yellow signs on the fencing on the junction are only visible to the first car waiting at the junction. They are also not legally effective and enforceable road signs. Finally, there's the sign outside the Theatre Royal, still obscured by buses after 3 months. Only when the visitor actually arrives on Museum Street do the signs become less ambiguous. Please CYC, use CLOSED and NO ENTRY signs and - importantly - let visitors know what and where is Lendal Bridge. If anybody knows how, please get this fiasco into the national forum. Clearly, the local forum is being ignored.[/p][/quote]I agree about getting this problem made national. This regime has now reached such proportions of incompetence in relentlessly pursuing its agenda that it's now time for someone or something, at the higher levels of UK law, to step in The figures speak for themselves Richard Catton
  • Score: 3

11:28am Mon 25 Nov 13

garethjv says...

again wrote:
It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax.

I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.
My fear is that it will have the opposite effect longer term when the whole thing is shown to have been done inadequately and fines must be returned and maybe even compensated. Add this to costs to administer it all and you'll find your council tax being wasted long term on this silly short term experiment.
[quote][p][bold]again[/bold] wrote: It's good to see they are doing something to reduce my council tax. I realise this may well not apply to many critics of the closure.[/p][/quote]My fear is that it will have the opposite effect longer term when the whole thing is shown to have been done inadequately and fines must be returned and maybe even compensated. Add this to costs to administer it all and you'll find your council tax being wasted long term on this silly short term experiment. garethjv
  • Score: 4

12:02pm Mon 25 Nov 13

garethjv says...

A more radical yet more useful experiment that the council should trial would be to eliminate all bus fares from the P&R stops. This has been done in other cities (St. Andrews is one that springs to mind). To partially fund this, the parking costs could be increased in the city centre.
A more radical yet more useful experiment that the council should trial would be to eliminate all bus fares from the P&R stops. This has been done in other cities (St. Andrews is one that springs to mind). To partially fund this, the parking costs could be increased in the city centre. garethjv
  • Score: 1

4:38pm Mon 25 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

Richard Catton wrote:
mmarshal wrote:
Why cannot CYC use clear No Entry and Road Ahead Closed signs (with an exclusion for local buses and taxis).
The signs on A19 at Clifton and on the approach to Bootham Bar are inadequate. The 'NEW' signs at Clifton still refer to Restricted Access; why not CLOSED?
The signs on the approach at Bootham are variously misleading. The large sign before the junction shows that the road ahead is closed (the road ahead is High Petergate); unless you know what and where Lendal Bridge is there's no indication of restrictions to the right (St Leonards Place/Museum Street). The recent small AA yellow signs on the fencing on the junction are only visible to the first car waiting at the junction. They are also not legally effective and enforceable road signs. Finally, there's the sign outside the Theatre Royal, still obscured by buses after 3 months.
Only when the visitor actually arrives on Museum Street do the signs become less ambiguous.
Please CYC, use CLOSED and NO ENTRY signs and - importantly - let visitors know what and where is Lendal Bridge.
If anybody knows how, please get this fiasco into the national forum. Clearly, the local forum is being ignored.
I agree about getting this problem made national. This regime has now reached such proportions of incompetence in relentlessly pursuing its agenda that it's now time for someone or something, at the higher levels of UK law, to step in
The figures speak for themselves
Which national forums are you considering. I'll gladly post to them.

I'm thinking of a Christmas carstop. We all turn up like a flash mob with our cars, both sides of the bridge on a given date and time .

I'll leave you to fill in the blanks.

After all, we cannot cross the bridge in case we get a PCN can we.

Hmmm wonder who would sort that little mess out?

Just saying! But boy it's tempting.

On the other hand it may happen naturally anyway.

Christmastime. York full of those bloomin annoying tourists who just can't stay away no matter how unfriendly the city is to them....

Only needs two cars at either side of the bridge to have a lightbulb moment and spot the signs.......

Imagine the local six o'clock news

Wouldn't be car crash tv....more like car park tv!

Just saying.....
[quote][p][bold]Richard Catton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mmarshal[/bold] wrote: Why cannot CYC use clear No Entry and Road Ahead Closed signs (with an exclusion for local buses and taxis). The signs on A19 at Clifton and on the approach to Bootham Bar are inadequate. The 'NEW' signs at Clifton still refer to Restricted Access; why not CLOSED? The signs on the approach at Bootham are variously misleading. The large sign before the junction shows that the road ahead is closed (the road ahead is High Petergate); unless you know what and where Lendal Bridge is there's no indication of restrictions to the right (St Leonards Place/Museum Street). The recent small AA yellow signs on the fencing on the junction are only visible to the first car waiting at the junction. They are also not legally effective and enforceable road signs. Finally, there's the sign outside the Theatre Royal, still obscured by buses after 3 months. Only when the visitor actually arrives on Museum Street do the signs become less ambiguous. Please CYC, use CLOSED and NO ENTRY signs and - importantly - let visitors know what and where is Lendal Bridge. If anybody knows how, please get this fiasco into the national forum. Clearly, the local forum is being ignored.[/p][/quote]I agree about getting this problem made national. This regime has now reached such proportions of incompetence in relentlessly pursuing its agenda that it's now time for someone or something, at the higher levels of UK law, to step in The figures speak for themselves[/p][/quote]Which national forums are you considering. I'll gladly post to them. I'm thinking of a Christmas carstop. We all turn up like a flash mob with our cars, both sides of the bridge on a given date and time . I'll leave you to fill in the blanks. After all, we cannot cross the bridge in case we get a PCN can we. Hmmm wonder who would sort that little mess out? Just saying! But boy it's tempting. On the other hand it may happen naturally anyway. Christmastime. York full of those bloomin annoying tourists who just can't stay away no matter how unfriendly the city is to them.... Only needs two cars at either side of the bridge to have a lightbulb moment and spot the signs....... Imagine the local six o'clock news Wouldn't be car crash tv....more like car park tv! Just saying..... Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 1

4:43pm Mon 25 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

I'm sitting here chortling away at the thought of it.
Imagine 26,000 angry drivers, especially the ones who haven't had their fines re imbursed.

It would take hours to clear the chaos. They'd have to open the bridge and switch off the cameras......
I'm sitting here chortling away at the thought of it. Imagine 26,000 angry drivers, especially the ones who haven't had their fines re imbursed. It would take hours to clear the chaos. They'd have to open the bridge and switch off the cameras...... Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 0

10:40am Tue 26 Nov 13

Mr Trellis says...

It is high time CYC put the same effort into fining the criminal cyclists who make York the most stressful place to drive and walk in the UK. Everyday I encounter bikes going the wrong way and speeding through the pedestrian area.
It is high time CYC put the same effort into fining the criminal cyclists who make York the most stressful place to drive and walk in the UK. Everyday I encounter bikes going the wrong way and speeding through the pedestrian area. Mr Trellis
  • Score: 0

1:34pm Tue 26 Nov 13

garethjv says...

Mr Trellis wrote:
It is high time CYC put the same effort into fining the criminal cyclists who make York the most stressful place to drive and walk in the UK. Everyday I encounter bikes going the wrong way and speeding through the pedestrian area.
Crikey you need to get out and about more if you think that of York! It's one of the easiest and safest places to drive, ride or walk I've known!
[quote][p][bold]Mr Trellis[/bold] wrote: It is high time CYC put the same effort into fining the criminal cyclists who make York the most stressful place to drive and walk in the UK. Everyday I encounter bikes going the wrong way and speeding through the pedestrian area.[/p][/quote]Crikey you need to get out and about more if you think that of York! It's one of the easiest and safest places to drive, ride or walk I've known! garethjv
  • Score: -1

9:36am Wed 27 Nov 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

Trip advisor pulling posts on lendal bridge!

No idea why?
Trip advisor pulling posts on lendal bridge! No idea why? Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 0

8:06pm Fri 29 Nov 13

Starboard22 says...

Why is Trip Adviser pulling all the posts on the Lendal Bridge fiasco. Have they been leaned on by York City Council or the hired enforcers in Northampton. Something very underhand about this whole episode. Again wheel clamping springs to mind. Can I ask the York Press to investigate, maybe a good story.
Why is Trip Adviser pulling all the posts on the Lendal Bridge fiasco. Have they been leaned on by York City Council or the hired enforcers in Northampton. Something very underhand about this whole episode. Again wheel clamping springs to mind. Can I ask the York Press to investigate, maybe a good story. Starboard22
  • Score: 2

9:10am Mon 2 Dec 13

Dontfleecethetourists says...

I've heard new signs are going up. Get your claims in peeps. That must be an admission of inadequate signage.
I've heard new signs are going up. Get your claims in peeps. That must be an admission of inadequate signage. Dontfleecethetourists
  • Score: 2

9:40pm Tue 10 Dec 13

loulio says...

I went into the tourist information to ask opening hours and directions to the railway museum, i stated i was in car and asked for driving directions, the lady told me in the directions to drive over lendel bridge, this was at 3.30pm on a sunday afternoon, hhmmm are these people on commission?? lovely £60 fine 2 weeks before christmas, i had plans to go back to york this weekend to do christmas shopping but they can ram it they have had enough money off me!!
I went into the tourist information to ask opening hours and directions to the railway museum, i stated i was in car and asked for driving directions, the lady told me in the directions to drive over lendel bridge, this was at 3.30pm on a sunday afternoon, hhmmm are these people on commission?? lovely £60 fine 2 weeks before christmas, i had plans to go back to york this weekend to do christmas shopping but they can ram it they have had enough money off me!! loulio
  • Score: 4

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