8,500 more fined for crossing Lendal Bridge

York Press: 8,500 more fined for crossing Lendal Bridge 8,500 more fined for crossing Lendal Bridge

A FURTHER 8,500 drivers have been fined for crossing York’s Lendal Bridge, bringing the total penalised since its trial closure began to more than 34,500.

Latest statistics have also revealed three out of York’s five Park & Ride bus services took slightly longer to get in and out of the city in November than in the same month last year.

The figures have been published by City of York Council in its third monthly update on the impact of the controversial closure of the bridge to cars, vans and motorbikes between 10.30am and 5pm, a key aim of which is to speed up bus journeys.

The 8,500 penalty charge notices (pcns) were issued from November 11 to December 2.

There were slight increases in the time taken for Park & Ride buses to the city centre from the Designer Outlet at Fulford, Grimston Bar and Monks Cross and slight decreases in the journey time from Rawcliffe Bar and Askham Bar.

Journey times from the city to Askham Bar, the Designer outlet and Grimston Bar increased slightly, the Monks Cross service journey was unchanged and the time to get to Rawcliffe decreased.

The council said all Park & Ride routes worked to a scheduled timetable and therefore required to arrive/leave destinations at certain times during the day, so overall journey times may mask improvements in reduced actual real-time travelling between stops.

A spokeswoman said: “Where buses are running faster, it means that they must wait longer at certain stops, predominantly at the Park & Ride sites or at their main city-centre stop, to maintain an equal time between buses arriving/departing.

“This means that unless the trial is made permanent and the scheduling of the buses is altered, it is not possible for the buses to take full advantage of the time savings being generated.”

Bus operator First has said the trial closure is helping improve service reliability and increase passenger numbers.

Business manager Will Pearson said yesterday the new report made a number of positive points about the punctuality and reliability of Park and Ride services.

“This supports our recent announcement that we have seen a three per cent reliability improvement in all our bus services in York, from September-November, compared to same period last year,” he said.

“Some Park and Ride Services that don’t use Lendal Bridge have had small declines in reliability in November due to circumstances identified in the report, eg new signals being identified at the A64 roundabout, as well as other factors such as roadworks.”

Darren Richardson, the council’s director of city services, was unable to give the total gross and net incomes received by the authority to date but said it had been calculated in November that, by the end of the trial, fines paid would come to approximately £600,000 after trial costs had been taken into account. This will be ringfenced for highways and transport projects, he said.

Comments (74)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:50am Tue 31 Dec 13

Woody G Mellor says...

If common sense prevails this "trial" will be abandoned immediately. But, with car haters such as Merrett making the decisions, idiocy and stubbornness will rule.
If common sense prevails this "trial" will be abandoned immediately. But, with car haters such as Merrett making the decisions, idiocy and stubbornness will rule. Woody G Mellor

9:53am Tue 31 Dec 13

allijew says...

Park and Ride TO Rawcliffe will be quicker as Bootham is quieter!
Park and Ride FROM Rawcliffe is a different statistic all together I am sure!
Park and Ride TO Rawcliffe will be quicker as Bootham is quieter! Park and Ride FROM Rawcliffe is a different statistic all together I am sure! allijew

9:59am Tue 31 Dec 13

Big Bad Wolf says...

There is no chance that this trial will end while the council is making this sort of money.
There is no chance that this trial will end while the council is making this sort of money. Big Bad Wolf

10:06am Tue 31 Dec 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...
C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour... AGuyFromStrensall

10:11am Tue 31 Dec 13

Heslington says...

8,500 dumb people, if you ask me. The bridge is closed and there are signs everywhere, including a huge and very ugly electronic one.
8,500 dumb people, if you ask me. The bridge is closed and there are signs everywhere, including a huge and very ugly electronic one. Heslington

10:14am Tue 31 Dec 13

inthesticks says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...
It`s very easy for one person to do that in a few minutes but what sort of idiot would want to spend time doing that? Shows they are rattled anyway about the strength of feeling against this from the public, and about any anti council comment actually.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...[/p][/quote]It`s very easy for one person to do that in a few minutes but what sort of idiot would want to spend time doing that? Shows they are rattled anyway about the strength of feeling against this from the public, and about any anti council comment actually. inthesticks

10:15am Tue 31 Dec 13

johnwill says...

The numbers are an embarrassment to York, if this number of motorists are being fined for using a closed road there is something wrong with the way the restriction has been implemented and that should have been addressed after the first week.
I would also say the Esplanade carpark was half empty at 11am the Saturday before Christmas was everyone on a bus ? If they were, they didn't get to town because most of the shops were quiet too.
The numbers are an embarrassment to York, if this number of motorists are being fined for using a closed road there is something wrong with the way the restriction has been implemented and that should have been addressed after the first week. I would also say the Esplanade carpark was half empty at 11am the Saturday before Christmas was everyone on a bus ? If they were, they didn't get to town because most of the shops were quiet too. johnwill

10:17am Tue 31 Dec 13

Mulgrave says...

A precis :- All the improvements in bus times are definitely due to the closure and all the declines are definitely not due to the closure.
A precis :- All the improvements in bus times are definitely due to the closure and all the declines are definitely not due to the closure. Mulgrave

10:21am Tue 31 Dec 13

Heslington says...

Would the ConDem parties overturn the closure? Bet they wouldn't when it came to it.
Would the ConDem parties overturn the closure? Bet they wouldn't when it came to it. Heslington

10:31am Tue 31 Dec 13

roadwars says...

A report full of contradictions;
3 out of 5 park and ride services taking longer yet "Business manager Will Pearson said yesterday the new report made a number of positive points about the punctuality and reliability of Park and Ride services"
A report full of contradictions; 3 out of 5 park and ride services taking longer yet "Business manager Will Pearson said yesterday the new report made a number of positive points about the punctuality and reliability of Park and Ride services" roadwars

10:32am Tue 31 Dec 13

Woody G Mellor says...

As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now! Woody G Mellor

10:36am Tue 31 Dec 13

CaroleBaines says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
More things in heaven and earth to worry about, though, don't you think? I find it quite amusing and no, it is not me!
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]More things in heaven and earth to worry about, though, don't you think? I find it quite amusing and no, it is not me! CaroleBaines

10:42am Tue 31 Dec 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

CaroleBaines wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
More things in heaven and earth to worry about, though, don't you think? I find it quite amusing and no, it is not me!
I betting if it was affecting your precious Lendal bridge closure you'd be picketing the press office however eh!
[quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]More things in heaven and earth to worry about, though, don't you think? I find it quite amusing and no, it is not me![/p][/quote]I betting if it was affecting your precious Lendal bridge closure you'd be picketing the press office however eh! AGuyFromStrensall

10:50am Tue 31 Dec 13

eeoodares says...

The council will not listen, come the next election we shall vote them out and ensure they do not get back in power for a generation.
The council will not listen, come the next election we shall vote them out and ensure they do not get back in power for a generation. eeoodares

10:52am Tue 31 Dec 13

eeoodares says...

It is great to see that the closure lobby have enough time to issue hundreds of thumbs down, sad people!
It is great to see that the closure lobby have enough time to issue hundreds of thumbs down, sad people! eeoodares

10:54am Tue 31 Dec 13

WhyEver says...

Breathtaking as usual from the Council who have already decided this trial is a success. The "Month Three Report" reads like a propoganda statement ready to be copied by the Press.

In their pre-trial evaluation they said "P&R services not restricted by timetable". Now they say "Park & Ride routes work to a scheduled timetable" - a handy excuse.

Roll on February 27th when we can see an end to this trial.
Breathtaking as usual from the Council who have already decided this trial is a success. The "Month Three Report" reads like a propoganda statement ready to be copied by the Press. In their pre-trial evaluation they said "P&R services not restricted by timetable". Now they say "Park & Ride routes work to a scheduled timetable" - a handy excuse. Roll on February 27th when we can see an end to this trial. WhyEver

10:58am Tue 31 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
If common sense prevails this "trial" will be abandoned immediately. But, with car haters such as Merrett making the decisions, idiocy and stubbornness will rule.
Have to completely agree with you woody, and the number of PCN’s issued is absolutely obscene, see also that ‘Merretts Marauders’ are at it with the scores, they are sad, wonder if they got any presents this Christmas?
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: If common sense prevails this "trial" will be abandoned immediately. But, with car haters such as Merrett making the decisions, idiocy and stubbornness will rule.[/p][/quote]Have to completely agree with you woody, and the number of PCN’s issued is absolutely obscene, see also that ‘Merretts Marauders’ are at it with the scores, they are sad, wonder if they got any presents this Christmas? Igiveinthen

10:59am Tue 31 Dec 13

Heslington says...

eeoodares wrote:
The council will not listen, come the next election we shall vote them out and ensure they do not get back in power for a generation.
But please do not forget how useless the Lib Dems were when they were in power. Can you imagine Wally Waller at the helm again or even Keith Aspden!?! An awful prospect.
[quote][p][bold]eeoodares[/bold] wrote: The council will not listen, come the next election we shall vote them out and ensure they do not get back in power for a generation.[/p][/quote]But please do not forget how useless the Lib Dems were when they were in power. Can you imagine Wally Waller at the helm again or even Keith Aspden!?! An awful prospect. Heslington

11:00am Tue 31 Dec 13

Lunatic says...

I'm still not in favour of the closure. But frankly, anybody who misses the road markings is driving without due care and attention and should be fined on those grounds alone.
I'm still not in favour of the closure. But frankly, anybody who misses the road markings is driving without due care and attention and should be fined on those grounds alone. Lunatic

11:02am Tue 31 Dec 13

Happytoliveinyork says...

I'd like to see the hard stats from First - not the usual propaganda speak
I'd like to see the hard stats from First - not the usual propaganda speak Happytoliveinyork

11:08am Tue 31 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013:

'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?'

This was their reply on 26/12/2013:

Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it.

Kind regards
Gavin Aitchison (news editor)

Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!!
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013: 'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?' This was their reply on 26/12/2013: Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it. Kind regards Gavin Aitchison (news editor) Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!! Igiveinthen

11:32am Tue 31 Dec 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Igiveinthen wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013:

'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?'

This was their reply on 26/12/2013:

Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it.

Kind regards
Gavin Aitchison (news editor)

Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!!
Wow 70 people (currently) are not happy at this... Terrible! ;)
[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013: 'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?' This was their reply on 26/12/2013: Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it. Kind regards Gavin Aitchison (news editor) Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!![/p][/quote]Wow 70 people (currently) are not happy at this... Terrible! ;) AGuyFromStrensall

11:38am Tue 31 Dec 13

AnotherPointofView says...

Igiveinthen wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013: 'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?' This was their reply on 26/12/2013: Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it. Kind regards Gavin Aitchison (news editor) Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!!
At least you got a reply. I wrote a couple of weeks ago, and am still waiting....
[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013: 'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?' This was their reply on 26/12/2013: Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it. Kind regards Gavin Aitchison (news editor) Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!![/p][/quote]At least you got a reply. I wrote a couple of weeks ago, and am still waiting.... AnotherPointofView

11:38am Tue 31 Dec 13

beretta says...

8500 further fines, don't you think there is something wrong with the signage on this so called trail ??
Maybe it suits the York council to make huge sums of money through this bridge closure.

The PRESS needs to get it's act together over the comments ratings, it's making them look bigger clowns than usual.
8500 further fines, don't you think there is something wrong with the signage on this so called trail ?? Maybe it suits the York council to make huge sums of money through this bridge closure. The PRESS needs to get it's act together over the comments ratings, it's making them look bigger clowns than usual. beretta

11:45am Tue 31 Dec 13

marvell says...

Given that 70% of the fines are issued to visitors, there are approximately 21,450 visitors plus their families who York has alienated by sending them a £60 fine due to inadequate signage. How much potential lost income is that likely to equate to for York businesses due to them not visiting again?

People can bleat on about it being the driver's fault for missing the signs but the sheer weight of numbers proves the signage is still massively inadequate.
Given that 70% of the fines are issued to visitors, there are approximately 21,450 visitors plus their families who York has alienated by sending them a £60 fine due to inadequate signage. How much potential lost income is that likely to equate to for York businesses due to them not visiting again? People can bleat on about it being the driver's fault for missing the signs but the sheer weight of numbers proves the signage is still massively inadequate. marvell

11:55am Tue 31 Dec 13

anti-rant says...

My concern is one of these unlucky drivers who has been fined is going to sue the council and WE will have to pay back all those fines with interest.

I cycle to work up and down Bootham, by the way, and think less cars are better but this is taking a hammer to a walnut.
My concern is one of these unlucky drivers who has been fined is going to sue the council and WE will have to pay back all those fines with interest. I cycle to work up and down Bootham, by the way, and think less cars are better but this is taking a hammer to a walnut. anti-rant

12:05pm Tue 31 Dec 13

pbrowne2009@live.co.uk says...

so if busses run on a scheduled time table, how does closing a bridge improve the efficiency on the whole scheme to improve the bus service in York? 34,500 fines have been handed out since 27th August. That's 287 per day and in real time that's 44 vehicles per hour. And then you have "authorized" vehicles crossing. It sounds like it hasn't really stopped traffic at all has it? Roll on February and we will see what happens but most of all, roll on the elections.
so if busses run on a scheduled time table, how does closing a bridge improve the efficiency on the whole scheme to improve the bus service in York? 34,500 fines have been handed out since 27th August. That's 287 per day and in real time that's 44 vehicles per hour. And then you have "authorized" vehicles crossing. It sounds like it hasn't really stopped traffic at all has it? Roll on February and we will see what happens but most of all, roll on the elections. pbrowne2009@live.co.uk

12:20pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Overproof says...

Someone has figured out that all you need to do is delete the cookies from your browser and you can vote again, and repeat deleting and voting as many times as you like
Someone has figured out that all you need to do is delete the cookies from your browser and you can vote again, and repeat deleting and voting as many times as you like Overproof

12:29pm Tue 31 Dec 13

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Overproof wrote:
Someone has figured out that all you need to do is delete the cookies from your browser and you can vote again, and repeat deleting and voting as many times as you like
Someone has waaay too much time on their hands as some comments have 300+ votes!
[quote][p][bold]Overproof[/bold] wrote: Someone has figured out that all you need to do is delete the cookies from your browser and you can vote again, and repeat deleting and voting as many times as you like[/p][/quote]Someone has waaay too much time on their hands as some comments have 300+ votes! AGuyFromStrensall

12:36pm Tue 31 Dec 13

baldiebiker says...

PLEASE VOTE FOR ME
PLEASE VOTE FOR ME baldiebiker

12:38pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Buzzz Light-year says...

Regarding the likes/dislikes manipulation: one word - script.
Regarding the likes/dislikes manipulation: one word - script. Buzzz Light-year

12:40pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Buzzz Light-year says...

Regarding the bridge closure: two words - hyperbole, rhetoric.
Regarding the bridge closure: two words - hyperbole, rhetoric. Buzzz Light-year

12:51pm Tue 31 Dec 13

pbrowne2009@live.co.uk says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Overproof wrote:
Someone has figured out that all you need to do is delete the cookies from your browser and you can vote again, and repeat deleting and voting as many times as you like
Someone has waaay too much time on their hands as some comments have 300+ votes!
not if you run a script that just removes cookies at the click of a button
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Overproof[/bold] wrote: Someone has figured out that all you need to do is delete the cookies from your browser and you can vote again, and repeat deleting and voting as many times as you like[/p][/quote]Someone has waaay too much time on their hands as some comments have 300+ votes![/p][/quote]not if you run a script that just removes cookies at the click of a button pbrowne2009@live.co.uk

1:16pm Tue 31 Dec 13

duffy says...

marvell wrote:
Given that 70% of the fines are issued to visitors, there are approximately 21,450 visitors plus their families who York has alienated by sending them a £60 fine due to inadequate signage. How much potential lost income is that likely to equate to for York businesses due to them not visiting again?

People can bleat on about it being the driver's fault for missing the signs but the sheer weight of numbers proves the signage is still massively inadequate.
Which is the heart of the matter. The fact is 44 cars an HOUR are heading over the bridge which shows there is a problem. I know the city although I don't live there and have noticed obvious issues. A sign stating Lendal bridge closed means nothing if you don't know where it is. When a visitor is driving through the city for the first time they are looking for certain buildings like the railway station, they are looking to avoid cyclists and tourists. They are often not reading further down the sign. I dont even think there is a sign at the junction where you turn right onto Lendal bridge and that's where you see cars trying to do a u turn.
There is still a problem and as it stands its going to cost the city in the long run.
[quote][p][bold]marvell[/bold] wrote: Given that 70% of the fines are issued to visitors, there are approximately 21,450 visitors plus their families who York has alienated by sending them a £60 fine due to inadequate signage. How much potential lost income is that likely to equate to for York businesses due to them not visiting again? People can bleat on about it being the driver's fault for missing the signs but the sheer weight of numbers proves the signage is still massively inadequate.[/p][/quote]Which is the heart of the matter. The fact is 44 cars an HOUR are heading over the bridge which shows there is a problem. I know the city although I don't live there and have noticed obvious issues. A sign stating Lendal bridge closed means nothing if you don't know where it is. When a visitor is driving through the city for the first time they are looking for certain buildings like the railway station, they are looking to avoid cyclists and tourists. They are often not reading further down the sign. I dont even think there is a sign at the junction where you turn right onto Lendal bridge and that's where you see cars trying to do a u turn. There is still a problem and as it stands its going to cost the city in the long run. duffy

1:24pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Rocking Horse says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...
It's the Labour Council's little-minded helpers.

Afraid of the truth; that the massive majority of York citizens are against this.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...[/p][/quote]It's the Labour Council's little-minded helpers. Afraid of the truth; that the massive majority of York citizens are against this. Rocking Horse

1:28pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Rocking Horse says...

inthesticks wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote: C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...
It`s very easy for one person to do that in a few minutes but what sort of idiot would want to spend time doing that? Shows they are rattled anyway about the strength of feeling against this from the public, and about any anti council comment actually.
Answer: same sort of idiot as those who are behind the trial closure.

If anything, it just makes this and them look even more desperate .
[quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: C'mon now Council apologists, tell me that the sudden jump in the space of three minutes of the first comment form +2 to -25 isn't manipulation of the system in the councils favour...[/p][/quote]It`s very easy for one person to do that in a few minutes but what sort of idiot would want to spend time doing that? Shows they are rattled anyway about the strength of feeling against this from the public, and about any anti council comment actually.[/p][/quote]Answer: same sort of idiot as those who are behind the trial closure. If anything, it just makes this and them look even more desperate . Rocking Horse

1:40pm Tue 31 Dec 13

CaroleBaines says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
CaroleBaines wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
More things in heaven and earth to worry about, though, don't you think? I find it quite amusing and no, it is not me!
I betting if it was affecting your precious Lendal bridge closure you'd be picketing the press office however eh!
You would lose your bet! Not that bothered about Lendal Bridge debate really other than being mildly in favour. If you want to get my ire up lets debate about allowing all that building stuff on the Knavesmire!
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CaroleBaines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]More things in heaven and earth to worry about, though, don't you think? I find it quite amusing and no, it is not me![/p][/quote]I betting if it was affecting your precious Lendal bridge closure you'd be picketing the press office however eh![/p][/quote]You would lose your bet! Not that bothered about Lendal Bridge debate really other than being mildly in favour. If you want to get my ire up lets debate about allowing all that building stuff on the Knavesmire! CaroleBaines

2:16pm Tue 31 Dec 13

BL2 says...

allijew wrote:
Park and Ride TO Rawcliffe will be quicker as Bootham is quieter! Park and Ride FROM Rawcliffe is a different statistic all together I am sure!
Travel time by car around 4-5pm is now around 1 hour from Rawcliffe to the station!
[quote][p][bold]allijew[/bold] wrote: Park and Ride TO Rawcliffe will be quicker as Bootham is quieter! Park and Ride FROM Rawcliffe is a different statistic all together I am sure![/p][/quote]Travel time by car around 4-5pm is now around 1 hour from Rawcliffe to the station! BL2

4:02pm Tue 31 Dec 13

pedalling paul says...

When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’.

Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly.

The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country.

So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.
When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’. Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly. The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country. So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys. pedalling paul

4:09pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Wrong Planet says...

PP - what exactly was the point of that post ?
You are refering to building NEW roads - we're all talking about Existing roads
I might be on the wrong planet - can't help where you're born - but you're from a completely different one
PP - what exactly was the point of that post ? You are refering to building NEW roads - we're all talking about Existing roads I might be on the wrong planet - can't help where you're born - but you're from a completely different one Wrong Planet

4:37pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

pedalling paul wrote:
When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’.

Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly.

The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country.

So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.
Oh please, please, please not your same old rubbish Paul!, how does building new roads on the outer edges of york or dualing the A1237 affect you cycling in the city? You can't build new roads in the city Paul so use your brain and stop being such 'top hat', do you get the euphemism Paul?, and keep wearing your POLITE cyclist hi-vis.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’. Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly. The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country. So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.[/p][/quote]Oh please, please, please not your same old rubbish Paul!, how does building new roads on the outer edges of york or dualing the A1237 affect you cycling in the city? You can't build new roads in the city Paul so use your brain and stop being such 'top hat', do you get the euphemism Paul?, and keep wearing your POLITE cyclist hi-vis. Igiveinthen

4:40pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Igiveinthen wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now!
This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013:

'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?'

This was their reply on 26/12/2013:

Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it.

Kind regards
Gavin Aitchison (news editor)

Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!!
Wow 70 people (currently) are not happy at this... Terrible! ;)
Oh please, please, please not your same old rubbish Paul!, how does building new roads on the outer edges of york or dualing the A1237 affect you cycling in the city? You can't build new roads in the city Paul so use your brain and stop being such 'top hat', do you get the euphemism Paul?, and keep wearing your POLITE cyclist hi-vis.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: As has been already mentioned. The Likes and Dislikes are being messed with, obviously from a car hater. C'mon The Press, sort this out, its been happening for at least a week now![/p][/quote]This is a copy of the email i sent to the press on 25/12/2013: 'As a regular commenter on news articles and letters, I can't help but notice as have many others, how the voting facility has been manipulated, it shows huge differentials i.e. +995 and -806 were two figures I noted, with all due respect these are indeed very highly suspect, please can you explain the reason?' This was their reply on 26/12/2013: Thanks for your email. Our web-desk are aware of this and are looking into it. Kind regards Gavin Aitchison (news editor) Looks like they have have not bothered at all!!![/p][/quote]Wow 70 people (currently) are not happy at this... Terrible! ;)[/p][/quote]Oh please, please, please not your same old rubbish Paul!, how does building new roads on the outer edges of york or dualing the A1237 affect you cycling in the city? You can't build new roads in the city Paul so use your brain and stop being such 'top hat', do you get the euphemism Paul?, and keep wearing your POLITE cyclist hi-vis. Igiveinthen

4:45pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Igiveinthen says...

AGuyFromStrensall - sorry don't know how the pp comment got linked to your comment but from -70 it's now -312 and counting!
AGuyFromStrensall - sorry don't know how the pp comment got linked to your comment but from -70 it's now -312 and counting! Igiveinthen

4:46pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Caecilius says...

johnwill wrote:
The numbers are an embarrassment to York, if this number of motorists are being fined for using a closed road there is something wrong with the way the restriction has been implemented and that should have been addressed after the first week.
I would also say the Esplanade carpark was half empty at 11am the Saturday before Christmas was everyone on a bus ? If they were, they didn't get to town because most of the shops were quiet too.
Or something is wrong with the motorists. Having both seen the prominent signs announcing when the bridge is closed and witnessed the stupidity, inattention, reckless lack of consideration and/or deliberate lawbreaking of a significant minority of drivers, that's the explanation I would go with.
[quote][p][bold]johnwill[/bold] wrote: The numbers are an embarrassment to York, if this number of motorists are being fined for using a closed road there is something wrong with the way the restriction has been implemented and that should have been addressed after the first week. I would also say the Esplanade carpark was half empty at 11am the Saturday before Christmas was everyone on a bus ? If they were, they didn't get to town because most of the shops were quiet too.[/p][/quote]Or something is wrong with the motorists. Having both seen the prominent signs announcing when the bridge is closed and witnessed the stupidity, inattention, reckless lack of consideration and/or deliberate lawbreaking of a significant minority of drivers, that's the explanation I would go with. Caecilius

5:01pm Tue 31 Dec 13

YorkTraveller says...

BL2 wrote:
allijew wrote:
Park and Ride TO Rawcliffe will be quicker as Bootham is quieter! Park and Ride FROM Rawcliffe is a different statistic all together I am sure!
Travel time by car around 4-5pm is now around 1 hour from Rawcliffe to the station!
You must be mistaken BL2 - the Rawcliffe Bar P&R follows the same route as cars into the city i.e. Clifton Green/Water End/Leeman Road and only takes 20 minutes.
[quote][p][bold]BL2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]allijew[/bold] wrote: Park and Ride TO Rawcliffe will be quicker as Bootham is quieter! Park and Ride FROM Rawcliffe is a different statistic all together I am sure![/p][/quote]Travel time by car around 4-5pm is now around 1 hour from Rawcliffe to the station![/p][/quote]You must be mistaken BL2 - the Rawcliffe Bar P&R follows the same route as cars into the city i.e. Clifton Green/Water End/Leeman Road and only takes 20 minutes. YorkTraveller

5:09pm Tue 31 Dec 13

eeoodares says...

pedalling paul wrote:
When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’.

Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly.

The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country.

So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.
You need to loosen your cycle helmet, it appears to be cutting off the blood supply to your 'brain'.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’. Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly. The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country. So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.[/p][/quote]You need to loosen your cycle helmet, it appears to be cutting off the blood supply to your 'brain'. eeoodares

5:20pm Tue 31 Dec 13

duffy says...

Caecilius wrote:
johnwill wrote:
The numbers are an embarrassment to York, if this number of motorists are being fined for using a closed road there is something wrong with the way the restriction has been implemented and that should have been addressed after the first week.
I would also say the Esplanade carpark was half empty at 11am the Saturday before Christmas was everyone on a bus ? If they were, they didn't get to town because most of the shops were quiet too.
Or something is wrong with the motorists. Having both seen the prominent signs announcing when the bridge is closed and witnessed the stupidity, inattention, reckless lack of consideration and/or deliberate lawbreaking of a significant minority of drivers, that's the explanation I would go with.
You still have to ask the question why so many ? An average of 44 per hour is way, way more than the average bus lane I have ever heard of. So what's the answer ? Leave it as it is, keep taking the money. Big risk given I think someone will challenge it in future, and if they win I hope the council have not spent it because they may have to pay it all back, if that happens guess who gets higher council tax bills ?
I think people need to out aside their pro and anti car views and look at what's going wrong. I would open it up again and do some real homework before the situation gets worse because the answer is certainly not just blaming everyone that drives a car.
[quote][p][bold]Caecilius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]johnwill[/bold] wrote: The numbers are an embarrassment to York, if this number of motorists are being fined for using a closed road there is something wrong with the way the restriction has been implemented and that should have been addressed after the first week. I would also say the Esplanade carpark was half empty at 11am the Saturday before Christmas was everyone on a bus ? If they were, they didn't get to town because most of the shops were quiet too.[/p][/quote]Or something is wrong with the motorists. Having both seen the prominent signs announcing when the bridge is closed and witnessed the stupidity, inattention, reckless lack of consideration and/or deliberate lawbreaking of a significant minority of drivers, that's the explanation I would go with.[/p][/quote]You still have to ask the question why so many ? An average of 44 per hour is way, way more than the average bus lane I have ever heard of. So what's the answer ? Leave it as it is, keep taking the money. Big risk given I think someone will challenge it in future, and if they win I hope the council have not spent it because they may have to pay it all back, if that happens guess who gets higher council tax bills ? I think people need to out aside their pro and anti car views and look at what's going wrong. I would open it up again and do some real homework before the situation gets worse because the answer is certainly not just blaming everyone that drives a car. duffy

5:24pm Tue 31 Dec 13

dementia says...

So the funds are to be ring fenced so that we may see more "initiatives" from the lot who have wreaked the bridge closures on us. Please can we spend it on road repairs,or a recycling collection next Christmas or anything except more initiatives.
So the funds are to be ring fenced so that we may see more "initiatives" from the lot who have wreaked the bridge closures on us. Please can we spend it on road repairs,or a recycling collection next Christmas or anything except more initiatives. dementia

5:36pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Alf Garnett says...

Keep it closed.
Keep it closed. Alf Garnett

5:37pm Tue 31 Dec 13

spragger says...

This is how YOUR Council looks after you. .
They pick your pockets for a £200,000 pa Chief Exec & loads of non jobs.
- Not satisfied with that they then pick your pocket again for driving in YOUR town
This is how YOUR Council looks after you. . They pick your pockets for a £200,000 pa Chief Exec & loads of non jobs. - Not satisfied with that they then pick your pocket again for driving in YOUR town spragger

6:05pm Tue 31 Dec 13

tricky1992000 says...

pedalling paul wrote:
When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’.

Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly.

The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country.

So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.
better not build any houses then, it will only encourage people to live in them. Better not grow any food then, it will only encourage people to eat it. Better not build any hospitals, it will only encourage people to get better in them.

Just to show how daft your argument is.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: When a new road is built, some existing journeys will divert onto it. Many people will make new trips they would otherwise not make, and will travel longer distances just because of the presence of the new road. This effect is known as ‘induced traffic’. Induced traffic means that the predicted congestion benefits of a new road are often quickly eroded. Traffic levels on bypassed roads can also rise faster than expected due to induced traffic, all of which means the hoped-for benefits of a new road can evaporate very quickly. The phenomenon of induced traffic has been observed by transport professionals repeatedly since 1925! And recent authoritative reviews have confirmed that induced traffic is still beating forecasts on new roads across the country. So do we try to cater for a seemingly incessant demand for car use, by increasing capacity which will only encourage bigger jams tomorrow. Or do we bite the transport bullet, and accept increasing restraint on car use, with yet more inducements to switch to other travel modes for some journeys.[/p][/quote]better not build any houses then, it will only encourage people to live in them. Better not grow any food then, it will only encourage people to eat it. Better not build any hospitals, it will only encourage people to get better in them. Just to show how daft your argument is. tricky1992000

6:38pm Tue 31 Dec 13

Silver says...

2 thousand plus likes on some comments, Maybe thats a story that nearly the same amount of fines is equal to almost that of a few comments on this site
2 thousand plus likes on some comments, Maybe thats a story that nearly the same amount of fines is equal to almost that of a few comments on this site Silver

7:17pm Tue 31 Dec 13

strangebuttrue? says...

I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?
I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer? strangebuttrue?

7:28pm Tue 31 Dec 13

strangebuttrue? says...

"Bus operator First has said the trial closure is helping improve service reliability and increase passenger numbers."

Or is it the cutting of fares (with more to come) or the continued traffic light & road closing bullying and harassment of residents who have to or choose to drive a car or the relentless advertising by the council or just the fact that the students are back?

It's all getting a bit desperate now whilst the rest of the city gets more pollution and congestion. Tell us First are you happy with the way York's residents are being made to wait in needless queues and being made to drive miles out of their way causing them to feel frustrated and angry? Do you agree with this as a policy?
"Bus operator First has said the trial closure is helping improve service reliability and increase passenger numbers." Or is it the cutting of fares (with more to come) or the continued traffic light & road closing bullying and harassment of residents who have to or choose to drive a car or the relentless advertising by the council or just the fact that the students are back? It's all getting a bit desperate now whilst the rest of the city gets more pollution and congestion. Tell us First are you happy with the way York's residents are being made to wait in needless queues and being made to drive miles out of their way causing them to feel frustrated and angry? Do you agree with this as a policy? strangebuttrue?

8:37pm Tue 31 Dec 13

yorkandproud says...

ROAD PRICING. This was a Labour Party policy at the last election. Alexander and Merrett have chosen to introduce this capitalist charge for Lendal Bridge. They are going against labour policies. Kick them out now. Where are you when you are needed to stand up for what is right. Councillors King, Horton, and you other experienced Labour men. Stand up and be counted. Vote of no confidence is what is needed.
ROAD PRICING. This was a Labour Party policy at the last election. Alexander and Merrett have chosen to introduce this capitalist charge for Lendal Bridge. They are going against labour policies. Kick them out now. Where are you when you are needed to stand up for what is right. Councillors King, Horton, and you other experienced Labour men. Stand up and be counted. Vote of no confidence is what is needed. yorkandproud

9:19pm Tue 31 Dec 13

yorkandproud says...

yorkandproud wrote:
ROAD PRICING. This was a Labour Party policy at the last election. Alexander and Merrett have chosen to introduce this capitalist charge for Lendal Bridge. They are going against labour policies. Kick them out now. Where are you when you are needed to stand up for what is right. Councillors King, Horton, and you other experienced Labour men. Stand up and be counted. Vote of no confidence is what is needed.
-78 in five minutes. You're having a laugh. If you are going to conduct scores, at least don't manipulate the vote. Is this Zimbabwe.
[quote][p][bold]yorkandproud[/bold] wrote: ROAD PRICING. This was a Labour Party policy at the last election. Alexander and Merrett have chosen to introduce this capitalist charge for Lendal Bridge. They are going against labour policies. Kick them out now. Where are you when you are needed to stand up for what is right. Councillors King, Horton, and you other experienced Labour men. Stand up and be counted. Vote of no confidence is what is needed.[/p][/quote]-78 in five minutes. You're having a laugh. If you are going to conduct scores, at least don't manipulate the vote. Is this Zimbabwe. yorkandproud

9:59pm Tue 31 Dec 13

ColdAsChristmas says...

'Whyever' is quite correct to suggest that if this is challenged CoYC may have to pay back all the money.
I therefore hope they can also get the money back from their agents in Northampton. I don't fancy funding this from Council tax that should be spent on our roads and bin collections etc.
The fat cats could set an example and take a cut for a start!
'Whyever' is quite correct to suggest that if this is challenged CoYC may have to pay back all the money. I therefore hope they can also get the money back from their agents in Northampton. I don't fancy funding this from Council tax that should be spent on our roads and bin collections etc. The fat cats could set an example and take a cut for a start! ColdAsChristmas

10:46pm Tue 31 Dec 13

wallman says...

remember Coppergate as well that was done very quietly
remember Coppergate as well that was done very quietly wallman

2:44am Wed 1 Jan 14

sniper 9964 says...

Car drivers are stupid they dont read road signs. Or they think its does nit appkt to them. IE why they stop / park in prohibited areas. Or make illegal turns in the rd. Increes the fine to £100.00 and put points on their licences
Car drivers are stupid they dont read road signs. Or they think its does nit appkt to them. IE why they stop / park in prohibited areas. Or make illegal turns in the rd. Increes the fine to £100.00 and put points on their licences sniper 9964

9:37am Wed 1 Jan 14

Jonlogical says...

At the projected rate of fines, York City council expect a 6 month trial to raise £600,000 yet they will raise almost £2 million. I would suggest a serious look at their running costs here.
At the projected rate of fines, York City council expect a 6 month trial to raise £600,000 yet they will raise almost £2 million. I would suggest a serious look at their running costs here. Jonlogical

10:34am Wed 1 Jan 14

WhyEver says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?
That's not just manipulation, it's the benefit you get with more traffic turning left, allowing longer green in that direction. Coming the other way, they changed the phasing to give more queuing on Lord Mayor's Walk / Clarence St and less in Gillygate itself -- but this was before the Lendal Bridge closure.
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?[/p][/quote]That's not just manipulation, it's the benefit you get with more traffic turning left, allowing longer green in that direction. Coming the other way, they changed the phasing to give more queuing on Lord Mayor's Walk / Clarence St and less in Gillygate itself -- but this was before the Lendal Bridge closure. WhyEver

10:55am Wed 1 Jan 14

Cheeky face says...

Quite right, the costs of the admin need to be obtained by FOI.

As well as that, we need the split between drivers and motorcyclists in each direction. I feel motor cyclists get off scot free (one way)as the ANPR is difficult when the motorcyclists drive towards the cameras!

Has the council full legallty obtained approval to extend the trial for the Lendal Bridge trial.



The signs at each end of the Bridge and Coppergate are still probably not legally correct if you follow top-down principles on legalese. Locally we read these signs and plates as we expect to see them, but the times should FOLLOW IMMEDIATELTLY BELOW the prohibited sign; THEN the exceptions; although they may arguably be not shown!.
Quite right, the costs of the admin need to be obtained by FOI. As well as that, we need the split between drivers and motorcyclists in each direction. I feel motor cyclists get off scot free (one way)as the ANPR is difficult when the motorcyclists drive towards the cameras! Has the council full legallty obtained approval to extend the trial for the Lendal Bridge trial. The signs at each end of the Bridge and Coppergate are still probably not legally correct if you follow top-down principles on legalese. Locally we read these signs and plates as we expect to see them, but the times should FOLLOW IMMEDIATELTLY BELOW the prohibited sign; THEN the exceptions; although they may arguably be not shown!. Cheeky face

11:42am Wed 1 Jan 14

ouseswimmer says...

Lendal Bridge still needs the sign saying 'Lendal Bridge'
Lendal Bridge still needs the sign saying 'Lendal Bridge' ouseswimmer

11:59am Wed 1 Jan 14

Ichabod76 says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
Car drivers are stupid they dont read road signs. Or they think its does nit appkt to them. IE why they stop / park in prohibited areas. Or make illegal turns in the rd. Increes the fine to £100.00 and put points on their licences
You've got some brass neck claiming other people are stupid !
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: Car drivers are stupid they dont read road signs. Or they think its does nit appkt to them. IE why they stop / park in prohibited areas. Or make illegal turns in the rd. Increes the fine to £100.00 and put points on their licences[/p][/quote]You've got some brass neck claiming other people are stupid ! Ichabod76

12:48pm Wed 1 Jan 14

Loollah says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?
Whilst I'm sure that is lovely for everyone who travels the Bootham and Gillygate area, with less traffic and quicker travelling times, can people please remember that all this traffic hasn't magically vanished from the city! It has gone somewhere! I see no one making comment of the fact that traffic on the other side of the city centre, i.e Lawrence Street, Barbican Road, Fulford Road, Cemetery Road is significantly increased since the Lendal Bridge closure. As a resident of this area, I've seen a major increase in traffic and travelling times. The roads around the city walls at Lawrence Street and Barbican Road are narrow and as such, with the increase in traffic it has made it even more dangerous for cyclists. I've stopped cycling altogether and taken to walking as after being almost knocked off my bike several times! (Please note at this stage, I'm not an anti-car, vigilante cyclist!).
Getting out of the city via Fulford Road is getting increasingly difficult too!

Whilst I'm sure that Lendal Bridge is quite literally an oasis of calm during the day with the closure, I really think that the residual effect it has had on other parts of the city means it really isn't worth the hassle!
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?[/p][/quote]Whilst I'm sure that is lovely for everyone who travels the Bootham and Gillygate area, with less traffic and quicker travelling times, can people please remember that all this traffic hasn't magically vanished from the city! It has gone somewhere! I see no one making comment of the fact that traffic on the other side of the city centre, i.e Lawrence Street, Barbican Road, Fulford Road, Cemetery Road is significantly increased since the Lendal Bridge closure. As a resident of this area, I've seen a major increase in traffic and travelling times. The roads around the city walls at Lawrence Street and Barbican Road are narrow and as such, with the increase in traffic it has made it even more dangerous for cyclists. I've stopped cycling altogether and taken to walking as after being almost knocked off my bike several times! (Please note at this stage, I'm not an anti-car, vigilante cyclist!). Getting out of the city via Fulford Road is getting increasingly difficult too! Whilst I'm sure that Lendal Bridge is quite literally an oasis of calm during the day with the closure, I really think that the residual effect it has had on other parts of the city means it really isn't worth the hassle! Loollah

2:11pm Wed 1 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

Loollah wrote:
strangebuttrue? wrote: I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?
Whilst I'm sure that is lovely for everyone who travels the Bootham and Gillygate area, with less traffic and quicker travelling times, can people please remember that all this traffic hasn't magically vanished from the city! It has gone somewhere! I see no one making comment of the fact that traffic on the other side of the city centre, i.e Lawrence Street, Barbican Road, Fulford Road, Cemetery Road is significantly increased since the Lendal Bridge closure. As a resident of this area, I've seen a major increase in traffic and travelling times. The roads around the city walls at Lawrence Street and Barbican Road are narrow and as such, with the increase in traffic it has made it even more dangerous for cyclists. I've stopped cycling altogether and taken to walking as after being almost knocked off my bike several times! (Please note at this stage, I'm not an anti-car, vigilante cyclist!). Getting out of the city via Fulford Road is getting increasingly difficult too! Whilst I'm sure that Lendal Bridge is quite literally an oasis of calm during the day with the closure, I really think that the residual effect it has had on other parts of the city means it really isn't worth the hassle!
Have to agree, I too am a resident in the area and can confirm what you are saying, unlike you I am a car driver, and would reiterate that on the whole I am not an anti-cyclist car driver, but there are others - no names mentioned - that are both anti-car and anti-cyclist, and despite comments expaining the down side of the Lendal Bridge restrictions, it falls on deaf ears, City of York Council included, who claim that it is a success and ignore the fact as you put it - the traffic has not magically vanished - it has found alternative routes as we the cycling and motoring fraternaty have found out.
I commented several weeks ago that the logical procedure before the Lendal Bridge resrtictions were put in place was to try and forsee what affect the displaced traffic would have on other areas, simple and logical traffic management in my opinion!
As for stupid comments such as - those driving over the bridge during restricted hours should be charged with driving without due care - I would answer that we residents are acutely aware of what is happening, unlike strangers who visit and have to contend with buses and taxis emerging from the station, all the box junctions, pedestrian crossings, traffic lights and bus lane, and still try and look for the signs telling them the bridge is closed during specified hours, whilst driving a car! and before anyone comments about the matrix sign that is the most misleading sign I have ever seen, with the arrow pointing left and into the bus lane!
[quote][p][bold]Loollah[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: I went down Bootham the other day, well twice actually. What was very noticeable was the changes to the phasing of the lights. From the end of Marygate it used to take about 4 goes to get through onto Gillygate now it only takes one!! So you can see how the council are manipulating the traffic here to get the results they want. From my observations, and I have said it before, if they just stopped all this queue creation (bullying & harassment) with their only let em through three at a time policy all of the roads would be traffic free as we would all be where we wanted to be. Lets face it the council do say there is less traffic now than in 2002 so how else could the queues and journey times be longer?[/p][/quote]Whilst I'm sure that is lovely for everyone who travels the Bootham and Gillygate area, with less traffic and quicker travelling times, can people please remember that all this traffic hasn't magically vanished from the city! It has gone somewhere! I see no one making comment of the fact that traffic on the other side of the city centre, i.e Lawrence Street, Barbican Road, Fulford Road, Cemetery Road is significantly increased since the Lendal Bridge closure. As a resident of this area, I've seen a major increase in traffic and travelling times. The roads around the city walls at Lawrence Street and Barbican Road are narrow and as such, with the increase in traffic it has made it even more dangerous for cyclists. I've stopped cycling altogether and taken to walking as after being almost knocked off my bike several times! (Please note at this stage, I'm not an anti-car, vigilante cyclist!). Getting out of the city via Fulford Road is getting increasingly difficult too! Whilst I'm sure that Lendal Bridge is quite literally an oasis of calm during the day with the closure, I really think that the residual effect it has had on other parts of the city means it really isn't worth the hassle![/p][/quote]Have to agree, I too am a resident in the area and can confirm what you are saying, unlike you I am a car driver, and would reiterate that on the whole I am not an anti-cyclist car driver, but there are others - no names mentioned - that are both anti-car and anti-cyclist, and despite comments expaining the down side of the Lendal Bridge restrictions, it falls on deaf ears, City of York Council included, who claim that it is a success and ignore the fact as you put it - the traffic has not magically vanished - it has found alternative routes as we the cycling and motoring fraternaty have found out. I commented several weeks ago that the logical procedure before the Lendal Bridge resrtictions were put in place was to try and forsee what affect the displaced traffic would have on other areas, simple and logical traffic management in my opinion! As for stupid comments such as - those driving over the bridge during restricted hours should be charged with driving without due care - I would answer that we residents are acutely aware of what is happening, unlike strangers who visit and have to contend with buses and taxis emerging from the station, all the box junctions, pedestrian crossings, traffic lights and bus lane, and still try and look for the signs telling them the bridge is closed during specified hours, whilst driving a car! and before anyone comments about the matrix sign that is the most misleading sign I have ever seen, with the arrow pointing left and into the bus lane! Igiveinthen

3:12pm Wed 1 Jan 14

acomblass says...

yorkandproud wrote:
ROAD PRICING. This was a Labour Party policy at the last election. Alexander and Merrett have chosen to introduce this capitalist charge for Lendal Bridge. They are going against labour policies. Kick them out now. Where are you when you are needed to stand up for what is right. Councillors King, Horton, and you other experienced Labour men. Stand up and be counted. Vote of no confidence is what is needed.
I would not hold my breath for either of the above lame duck councillors to stand up to Alexander. The Council is run by Ms England and her cohorts of Edmonson Jones and Halliday aided and abetted by Alexander, Simpson Laing \and Merrett. The other councillors are simply voting fodder.
[quote][p][bold]yorkandproud[/bold] wrote: ROAD PRICING. This was a Labour Party policy at the last election. Alexander and Merrett have chosen to introduce this capitalist charge for Lendal Bridge. They are going against labour policies. Kick them out now. Where are you when you are needed to stand up for what is right. Councillors King, Horton, and you other experienced Labour men. Stand up and be counted. Vote of no confidence is what is needed.[/p][/quote]I would not hold my breath for either of the above lame duck councillors to stand up to Alexander. The Council is run by Ms England and her cohorts of Edmonson Jones and Halliday aided and abetted by Alexander, Simpson Laing \and Merrett. The other councillors are simply voting fodder. acomblass

4:55pm Wed 1 Jan 14

mike.......durkin says...

this shud be band bridge shud be open for cars we pay tax to go on the roads not fines its just not right and not fear there just a cash caw
this shud be band bridge shud be open for cars we pay tax to go on the roads not fines its just not right and not fear there just a cash caw mike.......durkin

5:39pm Wed 1 Jan 14

Igiveinthen says...

Nationally I hope that Government will make consistent and long term investment in urban cycling right across the UK, to replace their present competitive bids from limited pots of money.
I would also like to see vehicle excise duty, wrongly called ‘road tax’, to be officially renamed ‘pollution tax’, and all emergency service ‘accident investigation unit’ vehicles renamed ‘collision investigation unit’.
“I hope that the Tour de France effect will produce a lasting enthusiasm for recreational and racing cycling, across the Yorkshire region. The recently suggested alliance with West Yorkshire might produce cash for a long demanded ‘upgrade’ of the A1237. But new capacity encourages more car travel. So I hope this debate will be tempered by a realistic 2014 assessment, of how few years it would be, before a dualled road becomes as congested as the existing one.

peddallingpaul's new year wish list, as if we don't have enough to contend with with the Lendal Bridge fiasco, yeah keep wishing Paul! Happy New Year from all your fans!
Nationally I hope that Government will make consistent and long term investment in urban cycling right across the UK, to replace their present competitive bids from limited pots of money. I would also like to see vehicle excise duty, wrongly called ‘road tax’, to be officially renamed ‘pollution tax’, and all emergency service ‘accident investigation unit’ vehicles renamed ‘collision investigation unit’. “I hope that the Tour de France effect will produce a lasting enthusiasm for recreational and racing cycling, across the Yorkshire region. The recently suggested alliance with West Yorkshire might produce cash for a long demanded ‘upgrade’ of the A1237. But new capacity encourages more car travel. So I hope this debate will be tempered by a realistic 2014 assessment, of how few years it would be, before a dualled road becomes as congested as the existing one. peddallingpaul's new year wish list, as if we don't have enough to contend with with the Lendal Bridge fiasco, yeah keep wishing Paul! Happy New Year from all your fans! Igiveinthen

9:41am Thu 2 Jan 14

meme says...

The actual problem whether you believe in the Lendal bridge closure or not is that people don't know which is Lendal bridge
IF the Council insist on closing it then the bridge should be signed with its name and a sign saying there is a £60 fine for crossing it out of hours. Then people would try to turn around rather than crossing it. This may cause chaos for a while but is an equitable solution
the illuminated signs could say
Approaching Lendal Bridge
£60 fine if used between 10.30 and 5.00
then there is no excuse for crossing it at wrong times
The actual problem whether you believe in the Lendal bridge closure or not is that people don't know which is Lendal bridge IF the Council insist on closing it then the bridge should be signed with its name and a sign saying there is a £60 fine for crossing it out of hours. Then people would try to turn around rather than crossing it. This may cause chaos for a while but is an equitable solution the illuminated signs could say Approaching Lendal Bridge £60 fine if used between 10.30 and 5.00 then there is no excuse for crossing it at wrong times meme

12:42pm Thu 2 Jan 14

duffy says...

meme wrote:
The actual problem whether you believe in the Lendal bridge closure or not is that people don't know which is Lendal bridge
IF the Council insist on closing it then the bridge should be signed with its name and a sign saying there is a £60 fine for crossing it out of hours. Then people would try to turn around rather than crossing it. This may cause chaos for a while but is an equitable solution
the illuminated signs could say
Approaching Lendal Bridge
£60 fine if used between 10.30 and 5.00
then there is no excuse for crossing it at wrong times
Correct, a tourist does not have a clue where Lendal bridge is, they would be better stating bridge on right/left/ ahead closed to cars. It's very poorly signed which is why there is a problem.
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: The actual problem whether you believe in the Lendal bridge closure or not is that people don't know which is Lendal bridge IF the Council insist on closing it then the bridge should be signed with its name and a sign saying there is a £60 fine for crossing it out of hours. Then people would try to turn around rather than crossing it. This may cause chaos for a while but is an equitable solution the illuminated signs could say Approaching Lendal Bridge £60 fine if used between 10.30 and 5.00 then there is no excuse for crossing it at wrong times[/p][/quote]Correct, a tourist does not have a clue where Lendal bridge is, they would be better stating bridge on right/left/ ahead closed to cars. It's very poorly signed which is why there is a problem. duffy

10:49pm Thu 2 Jan 14

Kev Benson says...

Make no mistake, people, this "trial" is a forgeone conclusion!

Come February the restriction will be increased to 7am-7pm, with the resultant rush hour chaos. As someone who drives all day around the city as a job, the route from Bishopthorpe Road/Nunnery Lane/Skeldergate Bridge/ Barbican Road/Foss Islands/ St Maurice's Road to Monk Bar is now a gridlocked no-go area, to be avoided at all costs. Quicker to travel down MIcklegate and over Ouse Bridge (until they close it in 2015 - you read it here first!) Of course, the likes of non-drivers Merritt/ Simpson-Laing would never venture that far afield, so what you don't see cannot hurt you.

In summary, please note my predictions: The trial will be a resounding success, and in 2015 - Ouse Bridge closure!
Make no mistake, people, this "trial" is a forgeone conclusion! Come February the restriction will be increased to 7am-7pm, with the resultant rush hour chaos. As someone who drives all day around the city as a job, the route from Bishopthorpe Road/Nunnery Lane/Skeldergate Bridge/ Barbican Road/Foss Islands/ St Maurice's Road to Monk Bar is now a gridlocked no-go area, to be avoided at all costs. Quicker to travel down MIcklegate and over Ouse Bridge (until they close it in 2015 - you read it here first!) Of course, the likes of non-drivers Merritt/ Simpson-Laing would never venture that far afield, so what you don't see cannot hurt you. In summary, please note my predictions: The trial will be a resounding success, and in 2015 - Ouse Bridge closure! Kev Benson

9:39am Sat 4 Jan 14

anth!! says...

Heslington wrote:
8,500 dumb people, if you ask me. The bridge is closed and there are signs everywhere, including a huge and very ugly electronic one.
Correct.
[quote][p][bold]Heslington[/bold] wrote: 8,500 dumb people, if you ask me. The bridge is closed and there are signs everywhere, including a huge and very ugly electronic one.[/p][/quote]Correct. anth!!

10:59pm Sat 4 Jan 14

swh1963 says...

The closure hasn't affected me personally - I walk or cycle over the bridge - but the damage it has done, both to residents and tourists, hugely outweighs its benefits. York's reputation and prosperity as a place to visit are seriously at risk by this misjudged and appallingly badly implemented closure. The signage from the station is perhaps adequate but the signage towards the station is beyond a joke and at crucial points non existent. I wouldn't be surprised to see an appeal leading to all these fines being rescinded, which in fairness they should be.
The closure hasn't affected me personally - I walk or cycle over the bridge - but the damage it has done, both to residents and tourists, hugely outweighs its benefits. York's reputation and prosperity as a place to visit are seriously at risk by this misjudged and appallingly badly implemented closure. The signage from the station is perhaps adequate but the signage towards the station is beyond a joke and at crucial points non existent. I wouldn't be surprised to see an appeal leading to all these fines being rescinded, which in fairness they should be. swh1963

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree