Lendal Bridge income hits £1.3m, new stats reveal - 10,000 have appealed and most have won - Fresh row over signs

Lendal Bridge income hits £1.3m, new stats reveal - 10,000 have appealed and most have won - Fresh row over signs

Two thirds of drivers fined were heading from Museum Street towards the station

One of the initial AA signs publicising the restrictions. City leaders have been criticised over the signage.

First published in News
Last updated
Exclusive by

YORK’S controversial Lendal Bridge restrictions have generated £1.3m in fines but many are being waived because officials lack the resources to fight appeals.

Almost a quarter of fines have been challenged and 64 per cent of appeals have been successful, new statistics obtained by The Press reveal.

The figures show 10,330 of the 42,800 penalty charge notices (PCNs) have been contested, including 6,564 successfully. Total fines income has now hit £1.3 million.

A City of York Council spokeswoman said: “This is due to us using our discretion when drivers have received multiple PCNs, and not contesting appeals when staff resources are limited.”

The statistics also reveal two thirds of all fines have been issued to motorists heading south-west on the bridge, towards the station, prompting renewed criticism of the signs around Bootham Bar, Museum Street and St Leonard’s Place.

The council spokeswoman said it had installed more signs in response to public feedback and said signage could be reviewed again if the trial is made permanent.

The current six-month trial runs until February 27, but it will continue while the council assesses its success or failure.

Kate McMullen, head of tourism organisation Visit York, today said the organisation remained “deeply concerned” about the impact of fines being issued to visitors inadvertently using the bridge. Statistics have shown 80 per cent of fines issued have been to non-York residents.

She said: “It’s crucial all visitors to York have an enjoyable stay without their visit being marred by a follow-up fine and York’s reputation as a welcoming friendly city is important to protect Reducing the number of fines being issued is our greatest concern and we’d like to see measures put in place to address this.”

The new figures are the first to show the breakdown based on direction of travel. By the end of December, 13,740 fines had been issued to traffic heading towards the Minster, but 27,314 had had been issued to traffic going the other way.

Gail Jordan, who works at Evie Brown's Tea Room at the foot of Bootham, said: "The signs they've got are just horrendous. It's just a yellow AA sign. It's not very clear at all.”

She said she wasn’t surprised most fines were for traffic heading from Bootham Bar and said: “I see so many cars going round that corner, and once they are round that corner, there are no more signs for them.”

Of the 36,236 fines paid, 27,937 were at the £30 rate, for paying within two weeks, and 8,298 paid £60 for slower payment or are facing additional action to force payment, possibly at an increased £90 rate.

Between Lendal Bridge and Coppergate, where new restrictions are also in place, 273 cases have referred to the national Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

York Liberal Democrat councillor Ann Reid, who raised questions at December’s council meeting about appeal levels, said last night: “This is the first time the council have admitted they have netted over £1.3m in fines. This is a huge amount but is it enough to offset the damage done to the city’s reputation nationally?"

She said the variance in the direction of fined drivers was striking and showed the signage was not right.

She added: "It would appear that winning your appeal is a matter of luck. It is difficult to understand how “staff resources are limited” when the council outsources the administration of the scheme to a company in Northampton. At the very least the administration of the scheme must be transparent and fair.”

Darren Richardson, the council’s director of city and environmental services, said the restriction was not to generate money but to reduce traffic, to enhance the city-centre.

He said the trial would help the council decide whether the restrictions should be abandoned, extended or made permanent. He said the signage was comprehensive and compliant with Department for Transport guidance, and informed drivers of the restriction timings and the use of camera enforcement.

There are more than 65 signs, including AA advisory signs on the Inner Ring Road and key routes into the city centre.

Mr Richardson added: “Following feedback from the public consultation the council has installed more signage directly in the Lendal Bridge area. Also following further feedback from visitors, the council has installed ‘Lendal Bridge’ signs adjacent to the bridge itself so we all know where the bridge is.”

The council also launched an online journey planner at www.itravelyork.info and published a map of existing signs at www.york.gov.uk/citycentreimprovements

The restrictions ban private traffic on the bridge between 10.30am and 5pm daily.

  • A council spokeswoman said that while approximately £1.3million was the total income generated to-date the council was projecting a net income, at the end of the trial, of £700k.

    "The £700k net revenue is based on analysing trends so far and an assumed continuation of this, with processing costs, set up costs and council monitoring costs taken into account. We are monitoring the trial as it progresses and forecasts suggest we will see a reduction in PCNs issued going forwards. This is ringfenced for Highways and Transport."

York Press: Lendal Bridge vote
The poll result above shows the result based on votes from distinct users.

Comments (130)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:17pm Tue 11 Feb 14

arg says...

I have to say though, that signs identifying the 'Minster Quarter' give me a weird sense of a second rate tourist trap: oh yes! York is a second rate Tourist Trap. But Pulease! can we get rid of the references to the 'Minster Quarter' - It isn't a quarter, nobody lives there, well hardly, and it really makes me think of York as a French or German city, Come to think of it, York is about the size of a quarter so ir should be the Minster sixteenth!!!!
I have to say though, that signs identifying the 'Minster Quarter' give me a weird sense of a second rate tourist trap: oh yes! York is a second rate Tourist Trap. But Pulease! can we get rid of the references to the 'Minster Quarter' - It isn't a quarter, nobody lives there, well hardly, and it really makes me think of York as a French or German city, Come to think of it, York is about the size of a quarter so ir should be the Minster sixteenth!!!! arg
  • Score: -32

7:20pm Tue 11 Feb 14

RingoStarr says...

Councillor Alexander, and his disciples, are a truly wonderous group of people who are worshipped by the people of York. Their closure of Lendal Bridge must be hailed as a momentous, and brilliant, decision and should be applauded by all. There is little, if any, doubt that our Labour leaders will romp to victory in the local elections to be held next year.
Councillor Alexander, and his disciples, are a truly wonderous group of people who are worshipped by the people of York. Their closure of Lendal Bridge must be hailed as a momentous, and brilliant, decision and should be applauded by all. There is little, if any, doubt that our Labour leaders will romp to victory in the local elections to be held next year. RingoStarr
  • Score: 27

7:27pm Tue 11 Feb 14

yorkandproud says...

arg wrote:
I have to say though, that signs identifying the 'Minster Quarter' give me a weird sense of a second rate tourist trap: oh yes! York is a second rate Tourist Trap. But Pulease! can we get rid of the references to the 'Minster Quarter' - It isn't a quarter, nobody lives there, well hardly, and it really makes me think of York as a French or German city, Come to think of it, York is about the size of a quarter so ir should be the Minster sixteenth!!!!
What a total load of rubbish. "Pulease", what is that supposed to mean. If you don't like York, and what it is, go live elsewhere, and take your clever remarks with you.
[quote][p][bold]arg[/bold] wrote: I have to say though, that signs identifying the 'Minster Quarter' give me a weird sense of a second rate tourist trap: oh yes! York is a second rate Tourist Trap. But Pulease! can we get rid of the references to the 'Minster Quarter' - It isn't a quarter, nobody lives there, well hardly, and it really makes me think of York as a French or German city, Come to think of it, York is about the size of a quarter so ir should be the Minster sixteenth!!!![/p][/quote]What a total load of rubbish. "Pulease", what is that supposed to mean. If you don't like York, and what it is, go live elsewhere, and take your clever remarks with you. yorkandproud
  • Score: 47

7:31pm Tue 11 Feb 14

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

wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear.. mike.......durkin
  • Score: 39

7:32pm Tue 11 Feb 14

eeoodares says...

"The current six-month trial runs until February 27, but it will continue while the council assesses its success or failure." What are the things that would identify it as a success?

This lot will make it up as they go along. The Labour party has been taken over by a group who no longer represent their electorate.

Vote them out and keep them out for at least a generation.
"The current six-month trial runs until February 27, but it will continue while the council assesses its success or failure." What are the things that would identify it as a success? This lot will make it up as they go along. The Labour party has been taken over by a group who no longer represent their electorate. Vote them out and keep them out for at least a generation. eeoodares
  • Score: 33

7:35pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Garrowby Turnoff says...

I cannot remember a more comprehensive shambolic and disruptive hair brained scheme in all of my life. It must be verging on the illegal to issue fines for an unworkable law that is experimental at best. Whoever blessed the instigation of such stupidity deserves the re-instigation of the skewering of their heads on a pikestaff on Micklegate Bar!

"‘Off with his head and set it on York gates" -Shakespeare's Henry VI.
I cannot remember a more comprehensive shambolic and disruptive hair brained scheme in all of my life. It must be verging on the illegal to issue fines for an unworkable law that is experimental at best. Whoever blessed the instigation of such stupidity deserves the re-instigation of the skewering of their heads on a pikestaff on Micklegate Bar! "‘Off with his head and set it on York gates" -Shakespeare's Henry VI. Garrowby Turnoff
  • Score: -28

8:06pm Tue 11 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

I am in the wrong business, I wish I had a bridge I could close just to penalise everyone tricked into crossing it !. There again that would mean hatred and derision aimed at me ....................
I think I better think it out again.
I am in the wrong business, I wish I had a bridge I could close just to penalise everyone tricked into crossing it !. There again that would mean hatred and derision aimed at me .................... I think I better think it out again. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -178

8:19pm Tue 11 Feb 14

big boy york says...

Why cant we as citizens put a vote of no confidence in this bunch of pillocks, surely there must be somewhere in the laws that state the rules or have they got rid of this in private aswell,
Why cant we as citizens put a vote of no confidence in this bunch of pillocks, surely there must be somewhere in the laws that state the rules or have they got rid of this in private aswell, big boy york
  • Score: -160

8:23pm Tue 11 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

big boy york wrote:
Why cant we as citizens put a vote of no confidence in this bunch of pillocks, surely there must be somewhere in the laws that state the rules or have they got rid of this in private aswell,
I hate that word , don't you ? ...........Bunch.
[quote][p][bold]big boy york[/bold] wrote: Why cant we as citizens put a vote of no confidence in this bunch of pillocks, surely there must be somewhere in the laws that state the rules or have they got rid of this in private aswell,[/p][/quote]I hate that word , don't you ? ...........Bunch. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -237

8:38pm Tue 11 Feb 14

b3nson says...

Councillor 'call me direct I'll sort it' Alexander and his band of ill informed non-driving colleagues has simply not got a clue. Out of touch and too arrogant to listen or acknowledge the huge scale of resentment he has caused! Don't kid yourself of any trial period and don't worry about any such criteria to judge it a success or failure - there aren't any. The trial will remain permanent - its already decided. Vote them and their MEP aspirations out!
Councillor 'call me direct I'll sort it' Alexander and his band of ill informed non-driving colleagues has simply not got a clue. Out of touch and too arrogant to listen or acknowledge the huge scale of resentment he has caused! Don't kid yourself of any trial period and don't worry about any such criteria to judge it a success or failure - there aren't any. The trial will remain permanent - its already decided. Vote them and their MEP aspirations out! b3nson
  • Score: -239

9:19pm Tue 11 Feb 14

yorkonafork says...

Did anyone go in to the Council consultation van regarding Blake Street/Exhibition square etc? In the 10 mins I was there four people told of their disappointment in the closure and reasoned factors as to why it doesn't benefit the good folk of York. The two councillors in there were quick to fob off any remarks made with 'we have had a lot of support for it' and didn't seem to care what was being said and had no answers (they'd previously mocked an occupant of the van for a remark made towards the new Blake Street proposals 20 seconds after he left).

I'm not against trialing things, trying to make thing better etc, not a problem at all. But this isn't a reasoned trial. It's not open about how success/failure is measured and it will, if it stays closed forever, not depend on the wants of the majority of the local tax-payers...or tourists for that matter.

I read comments here, see social networks which have comments, speak to friends, colleagues, customers in my store, family and it's just comment after comment on how bad the scheme is and why it simply isn't working. All from people who drive, walk, cycle, get the bus and so on.
Why would any individual (or individuals) want to carry on such a project. What can they possibly be getting out of this to think that everyone pretty much hating you is a good enough price?

It will stay closed, of course it will, going back to the Blake Street/Exhibition square proposals, which are clearly working with no cars going passed in mind. We do sadly have to wait until the next council are voted in for it to be open. It's all just a very bizarre situation which has got out of hand.
Did anyone go in to the Council consultation van regarding Blake Street/Exhibition square etc? In the 10 mins I was there four people told of their disappointment in the closure and reasoned factors as to why it doesn't benefit the good folk of York. The two councillors in there were quick to fob off any remarks made with 'we have had a lot of support for it' and didn't seem to care what was being said and had no answers (they'd previously mocked an occupant of the van for a remark made towards the new Blake Street proposals 20 seconds after he left). I'm not against trialing things, trying to make thing better etc, not a problem at all. But this isn't a reasoned trial. It's not open about how success/failure is measured and it will, if it stays closed forever, not depend on the wants of the majority of the local tax-payers...or tourists for that matter. I read comments here, see social networks which have comments, speak to friends, colleagues, customers in my store, family and it's just comment after comment on how bad the scheme is and why it simply isn't working. All from people who drive, walk, cycle, get the bus and so on. Why would any individual (or individuals) want to carry on such a project. What can they possibly be getting out of this to think that everyone pretty much hating you is a good enough price? It will stay closed, of course it will, going back to the Blake Street/Exhibition square proposals, which are clearly working with no cars going passed in mind. We do sadly have to wait until the next council are voted in for it to be open. It's all just a very bizarre situation which has got out of hand. yorkonafork
  • Score: -310

9:22pm Tue 11 Feb 14

ColdAsChristmas says...

Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.
Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings. ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: -293

9:24pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

This article is comparatively good.
Some effort has been put into collation and correlation, makes a change from textual recasting of press releases.

This is an incredible statement -
and not contesting appeals when staff resources are limited.

"Yeah sorry about the heart transplant and all, but staff resources were limitred..."
What a way to run a business.
Either they consider pursuing fines arbitrary and transient or they are reeeeeeally stretched.


Closing a bridge is akin to bricking up your windows.
This article is comparatively good. Some effort has been put into collation and correlation, makes a change from textual recasting of press releases. This is an incredible statement - [quote]and not contesting appeals when staff resources are limited.[/quote] "Yeah sorry about the heart transplant and all, but staff resources were limitred..." What a way to run a business. Either they consider pursuing fines arbitrary and transient or they are reeeeeeally stretched. Closing a bridge is akin to bricking up your windows. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 7

9:28pm Tue 11 Feb 14

yorkonafork says...

Actually one of the most bizarre things about this whole process is the fact that someone's having to break their back to give things a negative score, like people don't know what they're doing.

In 20 seconds, a simple refresh of my browser, my comment went from +1 to minus 17. What an absolute oddball that person is.
Actually one of the most bizarre things about this whole process is the fact that someone's having to break their back to give things a negative score, like people don't know what they're doing. In 20 seconds, a simple refresh of my browser, my comment went from +1 to minus 17. What an absolute oddball that person is. yorkonafork
  • Score: -894

9:52pm Tue 11 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Practical politics consists in ignoring facts, but ignoring them doesn't make them go away. There is plenty of evidence that supports the widely held belief that this council holds the citizens in contempt.

Opinion can be tested/trialled but permenent actions based on the same opinion should not be tolerated when known to be error and false.

Make no mistake when people have suggested that the signage is wrong it is in support of preventing innocent people being penalised for a poorly planned and executed trial, it is not support of the trial or outcome itself.

The only result this trial has produced is a minimal benefit for private enterprise at the expense of many thousands of residents.

If you believe the action at Lendal has popular support then I challenge you to put it to the test of referendum, a small cost for absolute clarity.
Practical politics consists in ignoring facts, but ignoring them doesn't make them go away. There is plenty of evidence that supports the widely held belief that this council holds the citizens in contempt. Opinion can be tested/trialled but permenent actions based on the same opinion should not be tolerated when known to be error and false. Make no mistake when people have suggested that the signage is wrong it is in support of preventing innocent people being penalised for a poorly planned and executed trial, it is not support of the trial or outcome itself. The only result this trial has produced is a minimal benefit for private enterprise at the expense of many thousands of residents. If you believe the action at Lendal has popular support then I challenge you to put it to the test of referendum, a small cost for absolute clarity. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -423

10:12pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Justin7 says...

Great additional money for the City, mostly out of the tourists pockets, so no complaints here!
Great additional money for the City, mostly out of the tourists pockets, so no complaints here! Justin7
  • Score: 1416

10:24pm Tue 11 Feb 14

courier46 says...

Oh! dear ,oh! dear,oh! dear.No more to say.
Oh! dear ,oh! dear,oh! dear.No more to say. courier46
  • Score: 1146

10:30pm Tue 11 Feb 14

pedalling paul says...

To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country? pedalling paul
  • Score: 424

10:40pm Tue 11 Feb 14

The OX says...

pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
People would still have the cars, weather it be in town or out of town, nothing to do with Lendal Bridge, just because the Bridge it shut wont mean ppl will sell there cars
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]People would still have the cars, weather it be in town or out of town, nothing to do with Lendal Bridge, just because the Bridge it shut wont mean ppl will sell there cars The OX
  • Score: 872

10:44pm Tue 11 Feb 14

Wrong Planet says...

A quick glance at the sign pictured above shows exactly how inadequate the signs are.
'Lendal Bridge, Restricted Access, 10:30am to 5pm, August 27th'
It is now February 11th so the bridge is not closed according to the sign
A quick glance at the sign pictured above shows exactly how inadequate the signs are. 'Lendal Bridge, Restricted Access, 10:30am to 5pm, August 27th' It is now February 11th so the bridge is not closed according to the sign Wrong Planet
  • Score: -42

12:13am Wed 12 Feb 14

JasBro says...

It's a shame that the emphasis in the Press is always on the number of fines, when that is such a small part of what is wrong with the closure.

The lies told by the council, the environmental and monetary cost of longer journeys and increased congestion, the restriction of public services like ambulances and police, the favoring of private taxi firms, the health consequences of increased pollution in residential areas and the cost to York's reputation and trade. The list goes on and on.

It's such a shame that so many political careers depend on pushing this divisive and nonsensical policy through. The sensible option would be to admit failure, but the council can't do that as it would be political suicide.
It's a shame that the emphasis in the Press is always on the number of fines, when that is such a small part of what is wrong with the closure. The lies told by the council, the environmental and monetary cost of longer journeys and increased congestion, the restriction of public services like ambulances and police, the favoring of private taxi firms, the health consequences of increased pollution in residential areas and the cost to York's reputation and trade. The list goes on and on. It's such a shame that so many political careers depend on pushing this divisive and nonsensical policy through. The sensible option would be to admit failure, but the council can't do that as it would be political suicide. JasBro
  • Score: -146

1:30am Wed 12 Feb 14

RingoStarr says...

RingoStarr wrote:
Councillor Alexander, and his disciples, are a truly wonderous group of people who are worshipped by the people of York. Their closure of Lendal Bridge must be hailed as a momentous, and brilliant, decision and should be applauded by all. There is little, if any, doubt that our Labour leaders will romp to victory in the local elections to be held next year.
Sorry, forgot to add that I was quoting P.Nokio here!
[quote][p][bold]RingoStarr[/bold] wrote: Councillor Alexander, and his disciples, are a truly wonderous group of people who are worshipped by the people of York. Their closure of Lendal Bridge must be hailed as a momentous, and brilliant, decision and should be applauded by all. There is little, if any, doubt that our Labour leaders will romp to victory in the local elections to be held next year.[/p][/quote]Sorry, forgot to add that I was quoting P.Nokio here! RingoStarr
  • Score: -57

3:40am Wed 12 Feb 14

Magicman! says...

Gail Jordan, who works at Evie Brown's Tea Room at the foot of Bootham, said: "The signs they've got are just horrendous. It's just a yellow AA sign. It's not very clear at all.” She said she wasn’t surprised most fines were for traffic heading from Bootham Bar

When you come along Gillygate towards the traffic lights, there is a bright yellow sign right opposite you attached to the railings outside what used to be the bus info office (probably still used for the open top tours). When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off.

If the closure is made permanent then some positive changes could be made... the junction of Lendal and Museum Street, outside the Museum Gardens entrance, could have a mini roundabout installed and then either a traffic island or very small build-outs on the bridge side of that mini roundabout, so that traffic coming from Bootham Bar area sees the mini roundabout and that the road ahead has been narrowed slightly along with the yellow-backed signs which state the traffic restrictions, and then they can turn around on the mini roundabout - this is the exact same reason why there is a mini roundabout in front of the rising bollard in Stonebow. Maybe go one stage further and apply for permission to use 'No Entry' signage with exemption plates... No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles - on yellow backing. Couldn't make it any more obvious than that.
[quote]Gail Jordan, who works at Evie Brown's Tea Room at the foot of Bootham, said: "The signs they've got are just horrendous. It's just a yellow AA sign. It's not very clear at all.” She said she wasn’t surprised most fines were for traffic heading from Bootham Bar[/quote] When you come along Gillygate towards the traffic lights, there is a bright yellow sign right opposite you attached to the railings outside what used to be the bus info office (probably still used for the open top tours). When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off. If the closure is made permanent then some positive changes could be made... the junction of Lendal and Museum Street, outside the Museum Gardens entrance, could have a mini roundabout installed and then either a traffic island or very small build-outs on the bridge side of that mini roundabout, so that traffic coming from Bootham Bar area sees the mini roundabout and that the road ahead has been narrowed slightly along with the yellow-backed signs which state the traffic restrictions, and then they can turn around on the mini roundabout - this is the exact same reason why there is a mini roundabout in front of the rising bollard in Stonebow. Maybe go one stage further and apply for permission to use 'No Entry' signage with exemption plates... No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles - on yellow backing. Couldn't make it any more obvious than that. Magicman!
  • Score: 21

8:09am Wed 12 Feb 14

chrisatyork says...

Press please do something about the hacker its getting very boring now
Press please do something about the hacker its getting very boring now chrisatyork
  • Score: 35

8:21am Wed 12 Feb 14

Dazmond says...

Mr Richardson added: “Following feedback from the public consultation the council has installed more signage directly in the Lendal Bridge area. Also following further feedback from visitors, the council has installed ‘Lendal Bridge’ signs adjacent to the bridge itself so we all know where the bridge is.”

hahahaha! I can't believe a public consultation was needed to point this out!

Oh dear, there really is little hope for any of this...
Mr Richardson added: “Following feedback from the public consultation the council has installed more signage directly in the Lendal Bridge area. Also following further feedback from visitors, the council has installed ‘Lendal Bridge’ signs adjacent to the bridge itself so we all know where the bridge is.” hahahaha! I can't believe a public consultation was needed to point this out! Oh dear, there really is little hope for any of this... Dazmond
  • Score: 18

8:28am Wed 12 Feb 14

JHardacre says...

"When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off."

I don't. I assume that it's for traffic that previously came across a sign saying Road Closed - Follow Diversion. If I hadn't seen such a sign I would naturally assume it did not apply to me.
"When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off." I don't. I assume that it's for traffic that previously came across a sign saying Road Closed - Follow Diversion. If I hadn't seen such a sign I would naturally assume it did not apply to me. JHardacre
  • Score: 0

8:29am Wed 12 Feb 14

old_geezer says...

"No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles" (Magicman) - yes, simple and clear. The bureaucratic huffing about the initial rubbish signage being "compliant with DfT guidelines" is a good example of tick-box mentality, hence why there is now extra signage including the mobile electronic display at Station Rise, with more planned.
"No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles" (Magicman) - yes, simple and clear. The bureaucratic huffing about the initial rubbish signage being "compliant with DfT guidelines" is a good example of tick-box mentality, hence why there is now extra signage including the mobile electronic display at Station Rise, with more planned. old_geezer
  • Score: 10

8:39am Wed 12 Feb 14

Woody G Mellor says...

For those fools defending the poor signage.

Please explain why over 10,000 people out of over 43,000 people have appealed?
For those fools defending the poor signage. Please explain why over 10,000 people out of over 43,000 people have appealed? Woody G Mellor
  • Score: 19

8:43am Wed 12 Feb 14

again says...

tonyfromitaly wrote:
I am in the wrong business, I wish I had a bridge I could close just to penalise everyone tricked into crossing it !. There again that would mean hatred and derision aimed at me ....................

I think I better think it out again.
Just look above your head. I think you might find there is a bridge there.
[quote][p][bold]tonyfromitaly[/bold] wrote: I am in the wrong business, I wish I had a bridge I could close just to penalise everyone tricked into crossing it !. There again that would mean hatred and derision aimed at me .................... I think I better think it out again.[/p][/quote]Just look above your head. I think you might find there is a bridge there. again
  • Score: 0

8:46am Wed 12 Feb 14

again says...

If these bridge offenders have such poor eyesight and comprehension of road signs, should they be driving at all, never mind a small fine?
If these bridge offenders have such poor eyesight and comprehension of road signs, should they be driving at all, never mind a small fine? again
  • Score: -30

8:55am Wed 12 Feb 14

Tug job says...

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.
Why do you keep going on about this book? It isn't meant to be taken seriously, it isn't an official ranking, it's just one in a series of books aimed at having a bit of fun at the expense of those towns that, from the author's point of view, take themselves too seriously. York isn't even a town, for goodness sake!
[quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.[/p][/quote]Why do you keep going on about this book? It isn't meant to be taken seriously, it isn't an official ranking, it's just one in a series of books aimed at having a bit of fun at the expense of those towns that, from the author's point of view, take themselves too seriously. York isn't even a town, for goodness sake! Tug job
  • Score: -2

8:57am Wed 12 Feb 14

Jiffy says...

Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said?? Jiffy
  • Score: 11

9:04am Wed 12 Feb 14

ouseswimmer says...

If the trial finishes on the 27th then I should imagine it will be illegal to impose fines after this period.
If the trial finishes on the 27th then I should imagine it will be illegal to impose fines after this period. ouseswimmer
  • Score: 4

9:07am Wed 12 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Jiffy wrote:
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
Cue in 5 minutes some "knowledgable" person coming along and saying that is irrelevent because (for some unexplained reason from them) only people who don't like the closure come on here.

No idea why the pro people avoid this page eh, one of life's mysteries...
[quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??[/p][/quote]Cue in 5 minutes some "knowledgable" person coming along and saying that is irrelevent because (for some unexplained reason from them) only people who don't like the closure come on here. No idea why the pro people avoid this page eh, one of life's mysteries... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -4

9:11am Wed 12 Feb 14

yorkboy says...

Well I hate this whole closing lendal bridge thing! But what gets me as someone who lives next to the station my life would be so much easier if I could cross the bridge but instead I spend hours sat in traffic on other routes, for people to blindly use lendal bridge and get let off fines!!! One rule for one and one for another, shall we all just use the bridge again?!
Well I hate this whole closing lendal bridge thing! But what gets me as someone who lives next to the station my life would be so much easier if I could cross the bridge but instead I spend hours sat in traffic on other routes, for people to blindly use lendal bridge and get let off fines!!! One rule for one and one for another, shall we all just use the bridge again?! yorkboy
  • Score: -6

9:15am Wed 12 Feb 14

york_chap says...

So £1.3m raised in fines but not enough resources to run the scheme. This council really is a shambolic mess.

It seems that barely anyone in York wanted this scheme before it was implemented; you'd think if you were going to push through a grossly unpopular scheme you'd at least make it run smoothly to try to convince people it actually serves some purpose and might be worthwhile.

Less traffic on Lendal Bridge and Exhibition Square where no-one actually lives, but increased traffic in residential areas like Leeman Road, Clifton Green, Shipton Road etc. hardly suggests a success.
So £1.3m raised in fines but not enough resources to run the scheme. This council really is a shambolic mess. It seems that barely anyone in York wanted this scheme before it was implemented; you'd think if you were going to push through a grossly unpopular scheme you'd at least make it run smoothly to try to convince people it actually serves some purpose and might be worthwhile. Less traffic on Lendal Bridge and Exhibition Square where no-one actually lives, but increased traffic in residential areas like Leeman Road, Clifton Green, Shipton Road etc. hardly suggests a success. york_chap
  • Score: 16

9:23am Wed 12 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

Theft on this scale usually results in a long prison term.
Theft on this scale usually results in a long prison term. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: 8

9:26am Wed 12 Feb 14

whitehorse says...

Tug job wrote:
ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.
Why do you keep going on about this book? It isn't meant to be taken seriously, it isn't an official ranking, it's just one in a series of books aimed at having a bit of fun at the expense of those towns that, from the author's point of view, take themselves too seriously. York isn't even a town, for goodness sake!
Since when did York cease to be a town? Certainly, references to a city might be considered inaccurate- given that it only achieves that title through the presence of a Bishop's seat. But it's definitely a town...
[quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.[/p][/quote]Why do you keep going on about this book? It isn't meant to be taken seriously, it isn't an official ranking, it's just one in a series of books aimed at having a bit of fun at the expense of those towns that, from the author's point of view, take themselves too seriously. York isn't even a town, for goodness sake![/p][/quote]Since when did York cease to be a town? Certainly, references to a city might be considered inaccurate- given that it only achieves that title through the presence of a Bishop's seat. But it's definitely a town... whitehorse
  • Score: 0

9:35am Wed 12 Feb 14

courier46 says...

whitehorse wrote:
Tug job wrote:
ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.
Why do you keep going on about this book? It isn't meant to be taken seriously, it isn't an official ranking, it's just one in a series of books aimed at having a bit of fun at the expense of those towns that, from the author's point of view, take themselves too seriously. York isn't even a town, for goodness sake!
Since when did York cease to be a town? Certainly, references to a city might be considered inaccurate- given that it only achieves that title through the presence of a Bishop's seat. But it's definitely a town...
What makes one place a city and another a town? There really are no hard and fast rules. Typically though, a city has a very large population, a long history, a government specific to that city and, in many cases, a university or college.
[quote][p][bold]whitehorse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ColdAsChristmas[/bold] wrote: Success = lifting £1.3 Million from the British public. Failure = everything else, including a reason for keeping York in the top 5 Cr*p Towns listings.[/p][/quote]Why do you keep going on about this book? It isn't meant to be taken seriously, it isn't an official ranking, it's just one in a series of books aimed at having a bit of fun at the expense of those towns that, from the author's point of view, take themselves too seriously. York isn't even a town, for goodness sake![/p][/quote]Since when did York cease to be a town? Certainly, references to a city might be considered inaccurate- given that it only achieves that title through the presence of a Bishop's seat. But it's definitely a town...[/p][/quote]What makes one place a city and another a town? There really are no hard and fast rules. Typically though, a city has a very large population, a long history, a government specific to that city and, in many cases, a university or college. courier46
  • Score: -13

9:36am Wed 12 Feb 14

courier46 says...

So based on above I would say York is more a city
So based on above I would say York is more a city courier46
  • Score: -11

9:42am Wed 12 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
Do you refer to the global warming as it was called after a couple of warmer summers where it was supposed to get that hot that our blood would boil and we would have no water to out the huge fires as our planet turned to dust?
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]Do you refer to the global warming as it was called after a couple of warmer summers where it was supposed to get that hot that our blood would boil and we would have no water to out the huge fires as our planet turned to dust? strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -11

9:52am Wed 12 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I believe it is Oxford council who say the closure of a couple of main roads due to flooding has, they estimate, cost their economy £40m!!. Yet York council do not see closing roads as a problem at all. Makes you wonder how good things could have been here without the councils hatred of cars and all who drive them.
Also interesting that several councils in the North East have decided to scrap parking charges. It would seem that after years of trying to bully people out of cars some are now recognising that people won't be bullied they will just go somewhere else. Not that I expect things to change in York until we get rid of at least a couple of our car hating councillors.

Goodness the score adjuster is up early today. A few seconds ago I refreshed my browser and the scores have changed dramatically in the last 5 mins. Had the press warned someone this story would be coming out. Still masking the truth is what everyone who supports this seems to have to do.
I believe it is Oxford council who say the closure of a couple of main roads due to flooding has, they estimate, cost their economy £40m!!. Yet York council do not see closing roads as a problem at all. Makes you wonder how good things could have been here without the councils hatred of cars and all who drive them. Also interesting that several councils in the North East have decided to scrap parking charges. It would seem that after years of trying to bully people out of cars some are now recognising that people won't be bullied they will just go somewhere else. Not that I expect things to change in York until we get rid of at least a couple of our car hating councillors. Goodness the score adjuster is up early today. A few seconds ago I refreshed my browser and the scores have changed dramatically in the last 5 mins. Had the press warned someone this story would be coming out. Still masking the truth is what everyone who supports this seems to have to do. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 5

9:53am Wed 12 Feb 14

ReginaldBiscuit says...

When I drive my rusty Ford Capri around York, I avoid Lendal Bridge because I know it could incur the wrath of the traffic gods. In truth, the Capri only makes it as far as Asda and Home Bargains via the car park that is the Northern Outer Ring-Road #Giggity

Road Tax is going anyway and I have a suspicion that Road Tolling will be it's cash-generating replacement. I am told that it's a fairer system because it taxes those who use the roads most anyway. I just wondered whether the council had thought of tolling some of the roads in York instead of creating penalty areas? That nutter out at Aldwark charges 20p to cross his bridge. I am sure most people would pay that. Great way to make loads of money and no problem chasing unpaid fines or generating 'I hate your city' letters from tourists who've missed the signs,
When I drive my rusty Ford Capri around York, I avoid Lendal Bridge because I know it could incur the wrath of the traffic gods. In truth, the Capri only makes it as far as Asda and Home Bargains via the car park that is the Northern Outer Ring-Road #Giggity Road Tax is going anyway and I have a suspicion that Road Tolling will be it's cash-generating replacement. I am told that it's a fairer system because it taxes those who use the roads most anyway. I just wondered whether the council had thought of tolling some of the roads in York instead of creating penalty areas? That nutter out at Aldwark charges 20p to cross his bridge. I am sure most people would pay that. Great way to make loads of money and no problem chasing unpaid fines or generating 'I hate your city' letters from tourists who've missed the signs, ReginaldBiscuit
  • Score: -19

10:10am Wed 12 Feb 14

JHardacre says...

CYC says that signage has been improved. I have news for them. It hasn't.

Approaching Bootham from Gillygate this morning there is a very clear sign that says Lendal Bridge closed between certain times. Nowhere does it even indicate which direction Lendal bridge is nor any indication of what alternative route should be taken. So, a very clear sign but an utterly useless one that conveys no meaningful information whatsoever.
CYC says that signage has been improved. I have news for them. It hasn't. Approaching Bootham from Gillygate this morning there is a very clear sign that says Lendal Bridge closed between certain times. Nowhere does it even indicate which direction Lendal bridge is nor any indication of what alternative route should be taken. So, a very clear sign but an utterly useless one that conveys no meaningful information whatsoever. JHardacre
  • Score: -3

10:16am Wed 12 Feb 14

sheddie says...

+1 from me for Magicman's suggestion:

"the junction of Lendal and Museum Street, outside the Museum Gardens entrance, could have a mini roundabout installed ... then they can turn around on the mini roundabout ..."

Might cost a few bob but the fines should fund it :-)
+1 from me for Magicman's suggestion: "the junction of Lendal and Museum Street, outside the Museum Gardens entrance, could have a mini roundabout installed ... then they can turn around on the mini roundabout ..." Might cost a few bob but the fines should fund it :-) sheddie
  • Score: -15

10:33am Wed 12 Feb 14

old_geezer says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Jiffy wrote:
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
Cue in 5 minutes some "knowledgable" person coming along and saying that is irrelevent because (for some unexplained reason from them) only people who don't like the closure come on here.

No idea why the pro people avoid this page eh, one of life's mysteries...
I'm pro
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??[/p][/quote]Cue in 5 minutes some "knowledgable" person coming along and saying that is irrelevent because (for some unexplained reason from them) only people who don't like the closure come on here. No idea why the pro people avoid this page eh, one of life's mysteries...[/p][/quote]I'm pro old_geezer
  • Score: -36

10:35am Wed 12 Feb 14

asd says...

I have always voted labour locally but I will not be this time. I have spoken to friends who are labour too and they say same thing, Alexander James is a conceited arrogant man. He reminds me of the previous Lib/dem bloke in charge who was exactly the same. These leaders are so up themselves it unbelievable, they are mini dictators, I know best so, keep quiet. It is widely known this is not a trial its to block of exhibition square for the new hotel. It is causing more pollution around York, traffic is worse around York, and guess what surprise surprise its a nice little earner now they are limited on Car parking cash cow too
I have always voted labour locally but I will not be this time. I have spoken to friends who are labour too and they say same thing, Alexander James is a conceited arrogant man. He reminds me of the previous Lib/dem bloke in charge who was exactly the same. These leaders are so up themselves it unbelievable, they are mini dictators, I know best so, keep quiet. It is widely known this is not a trial its to block of exhibition square for the new hotel. It is causing more pollution around York, traffic is worse around York, and guess what surprise surprise its a nice little earner now they are limited on Car parking cash cow too asd
  • Score: 19

10:45am Wed 12 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

old_geezer wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Jiffy wrote:
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
Cue in 5 minutes some "knowledgable" person coming along and saying that is irrelevent because (for some unexplained reason from them) only people who don't like the closure come on here.

No idea why the pro people avoid this page eh, one of life's mysteries...
I'm pro
Nothing like ignoring the rest of the context of a post is there...
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??[/p][/quote]Cue in 5 minutes some "knowledgable" person coming along and saying that is irrelevent because (for some unexplained reason from them) only people who don't like the closure come on here. No idea why the pro people avoid this page eh, one of life's mysteries...[/p][/quote]I'm pro[/p][/quote]Nothing like ignoring the rest of the context of a post is there... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -32

11:29am Wed 12 Feb 14

BL2 says...

I see someone has been manipulating the "likes" again...

The council spokeswoman said it had installed more signs in response to public feedback and said signage could be reviewed again if the trial is made permanent.


Just remember - this is a done deal. It is not, and never has been, a trial.
I see someone has been manipulating the "likes" again... [quote]The council spokeswoman said it had installed more signs in response to public feedback and said signage could be reviewed again if the trial is made permanent. [/quote] Just remember - this is a done deal. It is not, and never has been, a trial. BL2
  • Score: -11

11:29am Wed 12 Feb 14

courier46 says...

asd wrote:
I have always voted labour locally but I will not be this time. I have spoken to friends who are labour too and they say same thing, Alexander James is a conceited arrogant man. He reminds me of the previous Lib/dem bloke in charge who was exactly the same. These leaders are so up themselves it unbelievable, they are mini dictators, I know best so, keep quiet. It is widely known this is not a trial its to block of exhibition square for the new hotel. It is causing more pollution around York, traffic is worse around York, and guess what surprise surprise its a nice little earner now they are limited on Car parking cash cow too
Myself and 2 other members of my family will not be voting for them either,the tricky thing is who do we vote for to make 100% sure they are out in 2015?.
What these people don't realize is that every vote does count.
A few years back I think it was the Lib Dems won by 3 votes so the way these destroyers of York treat the majority I think there going to get a shock.
[quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: I have always voted labour locally but I will not be this time. I have spoken to friends who are labour too and they say same thing, Alexander James is a conceited arrogant man. He reminds me of the previous Lib/dem bloke in charge who was exactly the same. These leaders are so up themselves it unbelievable, they are mini dictators, I know best so, keep quiet. It is widely known this is not a trial its to block of exhibition square for the new hotel. It is causing more pollution around York, traffic is worse around York, and guess what surprise surprise its a nice little earner now they are limited on Car parking cash cow too[/p][/quote]Myself and 2 other members of my family will not be voting for them either,the tricky thing is who do we vote for to make 100% sure they are out in 2015?. What these people don't realize is that every vote does count. A few years back I think it was the Lib Dems won by 3 votes so the way these destroyers of York treat the majority I think there going to get a shock. courier46
  • Score: -10

11:33am Wed 12 Feb 14

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

I see the person paid for pressing the 'dislike' button went home at 9.25 last night...
I see the person paid for pressing the 'dislike' button went home at 9.25 last night... Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: -22

11:36am Wed 12 Feb 14

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

.. and got home and did a bit of overtime till the early hours.
.. and got home and did a bit of overtime till the early hours. Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: -24

11:54am Wed 12 Feb 14

Turnedoutniceagain says...

Never bothered voting in local elections before. I will be from now on.
Think I might even photocopy my voting card a few thousand times.
Never bothered voting in local elections before. I will be from now on. Think I might even photocopy my voting card a few thousand times. Turnedoutniceagain
  • Score: -9

12:02pm Wed 12 Feb 14

inthesticks says...

Jiffy wrote:
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
I`m afraid that means nothing, it can be easily manipulated at the touch of a button just like the thumbs up or down on comments.
It`s Newsquest that wants the comments to have a like/dislike facility not YP or the Editor. - Not saying they are opposed, just that it`s not up to them.
[quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??[/p][/quote]I`m afraid that means nothing, it can be easily manipulated at the touch of a button just like the thumbs up or down on comments. It`s Newsquest that wants the comments to have a like/dislike facility not YP or the Editor. - Not saying they are opposed, just that it`s not up to them. inthesticks
  • Score: -13

12:20pm Wed 12 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

inthesticks wrote:
Jiffy wrote:
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
I`m afraid that means nothing, it can be easily manipulated at the touch of a button just like the thumbs up or down on comments.
It`s Newsquest that wants the comments to have a like/dislike facility not YP or the Editor. - Not saying they are opposed, just that it`s not up to them.
Errrr, no it's not, you trying to not logging in and try and vote....

But of course any evidence that people are massively against is flawed...
[quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??[/p][/quote]I`m afraid that means nothing, it can be easily manipulated at the touch of a button just like the thumbs up or down on comments. It`s Newsquest that wants the comments to have a like/dislike facility not YP or the Editor. - Not saying they are opposed, just that it`s not up to them.[/p][/quote]Errrr, no it's not, you trying to not logging in and try and vote.... But of course any evidence that people are massively against is flawed... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -23

12:22pm Wed 12 Feb 14

eeoodares says...

pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
Not one jot, not even a little bit!

Please try to get it around your single dimension that, it uses more energy to create a car than it will ever use in its lifetime. So the next time you see someone driving a 15 year old Range Rover, that does 10 mpg, you should applaud them on their green credentials, and boo at people droning around in their new Prius.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]Not one jot, not even a little bit! Please try to get it around your single dimension that, it uses more energy to create a car than it will ever use in its lifetime. So the next time you see someone driving a 15 year old Range Rover, that does 10 mpg, you should applaud them on their green credentials, and boo at people droning around in their new Prius. eeoodares
  • Score: -13

12:58pm Wed 12 Feb 14

inthesticks says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
inthesticks wrote:
Jiffy wrote:
Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??
I`m afraid that means nothing, it can be easily manipulated at the touch of a button just like the thumbs up or down on comments.
It`s Newsquest that wants the comments to have a like/dislike facility not YP or the Editor. - Not saying they are opposed, just that it`s not up to them.
Errrr, no it's not, you trying to not logging in and try and vote....

But of course any evidence that people are massively against is flawed...
I`m not going to put up on here how it`s done, I think someone has already posted that before, but if you understand how cookies work on a computer then it`s pretty simple, a 5 year old could do it.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jiffy[/bold] wrote: Public consultation - look at the poll above - 6% extended, 6% maintained with a whopping 89% thinking it should be abandoned. Nuff said??[/p][/quote]I`m afraid that means nothing, it can be easily manipulated at the touch of a button just like the thumbs up or down on comments. It`s Newsquest that wants the comments to have a like/dislike facility not YP or the Editor. - Not saying they are opposed, just that it`s not up to them.[/p][/quote]Errrr, no it's not, you trying to not logging in and try and vote.... But of course any evidence that people are massively against is flawed...[/p][/quote]I`m not going to put up on here how it`s done, I think someone has already posted that before, but if you understand how cookies work on a computer then it`s pretty simple, a 5 year old could do it. inthesticks
  • Score: -43

1:08pm Wed 12 Feb 14

WhyEver says...

JasBro wrote:
It's a shame that the emphasis in the Press is always on the number of fines, when that is such a small part of what is wrong with the closure.

The lies told by the council, the environmental and monetary cost of longer journeys and increased congestion, the restriction of public services like ambulances and police, the favoring of private taxi firms, the health consequences of increased pollution in residential areas and the cost to York's reputation and trade. The list goes on and on.

It's such a shame that so many political careers depend on pushing this divisive and nonsensical policy through. The sensible option would be to admit failure, but the council can't do that as it would be political suicide.
Hear, hear - I expect the council will promise to fix the problem with fines and ignore the impact on the rest of the City. Benefits to the Lendal area are publicised, but congestion and traffic increases elsewhere are dismissed as "acceptable".

Only two weeks of the trial left now!
[quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: It's a shame that the emphasis in the Press is always on the number of fines, when that is such a small part of what is wrong with the closure. The lies told by the council, the environmental and monetary cost of longer journeys and increased congestion, the restriction of public services like ambulances and police, the favoring of private taxi firms, the health consequences of increased pollution in residential areas and the cost to York's reputation and trade. The list goes on and on. It's such a shame that so many political careers depend on pushing this divisive and nonsensical policy through. The sensible option would be to admit failure, but the council can't do that as it would be political suicide.[/p][/quote]Hear, hear - I expect the council will promise to fix the problem with fines and ignore the impact on the rest of the City. Benefits to the Lendal area are publicised, but congestion and traffic increases elsewhere are dismissed as "acceptable". Only two weeks of the trial left now! WhyEver
  • Score: -41

1:14pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

So let me get this right. all the funds from this debacle are going to be pumped back into road improvements. I will believe that when i see it. Or if they do it will be wasted like usual. Remember the cycle line at the Clifton green junction. How much did that cost to do... and then revert back... there are loads of other examples too. The fact is the road works always happen at the end of the financial year on cr@p (take note driving around there are loads going on now) so they can meet their target and to make sure there is no reduction in this. In my opinion they will use this money along with the increased council tax to fund the deficit caused by their outrageous spending and lack of respect for money.
So let me get this right. all the funds from this debacle are going to be pumped back into road improvements. I will believe that when i see it. Or if they do it will be wasted like usual. Remember the cycle line at the Clifton green junction. How much did that cost to do... and then revert back... there are loads of other examples too. The fact is the road works always happen at the end of the financial year on cr@p (take note driving around there are loads going on now) so they can meet their target and to make sure there is no reduction in this. In my opinion they will use this money along with the increased council tax to fund the deficit caused by their outrageous spending and lack of respect for money. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -19

2:40pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Salsaman says...

A City of York Council spokeswoman said: “and not contesting appeals when staff resources are limited.”

So what is the £254,000 that the fines have yealeded so far and been spent running the trial ( YCC figures) paid for? by my reconing that would pay 20 staff at Senior Officer level for a year?
A City of York Council spokeswoman said: “and not contesting appeals when staff resources are limited.” So what is the £254,000 that the fines have yealeded so far and been spent running the trial ( YCC figures) paid for? by my reconing that would pay 20 staff at Senior Officer level for a year? Salsaman
  • Score: -31

2:55pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Mr. Marcus says...

tonyfromitaly wrote:
big boy york wrote:
Why cant we as citizens put a vote of no confidence in this bunch of pillocks, surely there must be somewhere in the laws that state the rules or have they got rid of this in private aswell,
I hate that word , don't you ? ...........Bunch.
Well, TonyfromItaly, the word "BUNCH" does describe the word for Alexander and his gabg of croos.
Coming from Italy, you now about the mafia: the York mafia must be voted out of office as soon as possible before they close our city by their inane "polices".
[quote][p][bold]tonyfromitaly[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]big boy york[/bold] wrote: Why cant we as citizens put a vote of no confidence in this bunch of pillocks, surely there must be somewhere in the laws that state the rules or have they got rid of this in private aswell,[/p][/quote]I hate that word , don't you ? ...........Bunch.[/p][/quote]Well, TonyfromItaly, the word "BUNCH" does describe the word for Alexander and his gabg of croos. Coming from Italy, you now about the mafia: the York mafia must be voted out of office as soon as possible before they close our city by their inane "polices". Mr. Marcus
  • Score: -33

3:02pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Mr. Marcus says...

JasBro wrote:
It's a shame that the emphasis in the Press is always on the number of fines, when that is such a small part of what is wrong with the closure.

The lies told by the council, the environmental and monetary cost of longer journeys and increased congestion, the restriction of public services like ambulances and police, the favoring of private taxi firms, the health consequences of increased pollution in residential areas and the cost to York's reputation and trade. The list goes on and on.

It's such a shame that so many political careers depend on pushing this divisive and nonsensical policy through. The sensible option would be to admit failure, but the council can't do that as it would be political suicide.
I think that the political lives of Alexander, Merret and the gang are over.
It is time that they try and find new jobs. Try Mongolia.
[quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: It's a shame that the emphasis in the Press is always on the number of fines, when that is such a small part of what is wrong with the closure. The lies told by the council, the environmental and monetary cost of longer journeys and increased congestion, the restriction of public services like ambulances and police, the favoring of private taxi firms, the health consequences of increased pollution in residential areas and the cost to York's reputation and trade. The list goes on and on. It's such a shame that so many political careers depend on pushing this divisive and nonsensical policy through. The sensible option would be to admit failure, but the council can't do that as it would be political suicide.[/p][/quote]I think that the political lives of Alexander, Merret and the gang are over. It is time that they try and find new jobs. Try Mongolia. Mr. Marcus
  • Score: -15

3:04pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Mr. Marcus says...

chrisatyork wrote:
Press please do something about the hacker its getting very boring now
I think that the political lives of Alexander, Merret and the gang are over.
It is time that they try and find new jobs. Try Mongolia.
[quote][p][bold]chrisatyork[/bold] wrote: Press please do something about the hacker its getting very boring now[/p][/quote]I think that the political lives of Alexander, Merret and the gang are over. It is time that they try and find new jobs. Try Mongolia. Mr. Marcus
  • Score: -32

3:07pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Mr. Marcus says...

chrisatyork wrote:
Press please do something about the hacker its getting very boring now
Yes, Press, the hacker is quite boring.
He/she/they must work at the council, with that much time to spend hacking.
York Press, it is in your hands to stop this hacker.
[quote][p][bold]chrisatyork[/bold] wrote: Press please do something about the hacker its getting very boring now[/p][/quote]Yes, Press, the hacker is quite boring. He/she/they must work at the council, with that much time to spend hacking. York Press, it is in your hands to stop this hacker. Mr. Marcus
  • Score: -38

3:17pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Devils_advocate says...

pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change. Devils_advocate
  • Score: -16

3:35pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Garrowby Turnoff says...

Devils_advocate wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.
'Av this... You've only got to look at Central London where there are thousands of private cars. There's no flooding there!

Yet Somerset, where it's flat countryside with quiet roads and bikes, is banjaxed with flooding. On this evidence if you don't want floods and pestilence throw your bike in the Ouse, jump in your car and rev it up in a traffic jam, and you'll be flood free!

I'n'it?
[quote][p][bold]Devils_advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.[/p][/quote]'Av this... You've only got to look at Central London where there are thousands of private cars. There's no flooding there! Yet Somerset, where it's flat countryside with quiet roads and bikes, is banjaxed with flooding. On this evidence if you don't want floods and pestilence throw your bike in the Ouse, jump in your car and rev it up in a traffic jam, and you'll be flood free! I'n'it? Garrowby Turnoff
  • Score: -28

4:09pm Wed 12 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
This is the worst weather recorded for 172 years, so what are we blaming 172 years ago, horse **** ?.

Even if the weather was directly attributable to the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, it would take a total fool to believe the solution was to make them drive further for longer.

The opinion poll at the top of the page is a great insight currently:

Abandon = 83%
Extend = 6%
Maintain = 11%

However it will be hacked later because it does not represent the outcome a certain small group has already decided upon. Only a group with direct connection to this trial would invest the time and effort to feebly attempt to mislead.

Seems clear our elected representatives are deaf to the objections raised so far. The time is nearing where It maybe necessary to test their eyesight with feet on the street, 80%+ is a big visual statement.
The alternative is to allow this abuse of position, power and information to continue, it would also confirm to this council that they can do what they want because we as residents have no voice and are a meaningless irritation.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]This is the worst weather recorded for 172 years, so what are we blaming 172 years ago, horse **** ?. Even if the weather was directly attributable to the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, it would take a total fool to believe the solution was to make them drive further for longer. The opinion poll at the top of the page is a great insight currently: Abandon = 83% Extend = 6% Maintain = 11% However it will be hacked later because it does not represent the outcome a certain small group has already decided upon. Only a group with direct connection to this trial would invest the time and effort to feebly attempt to mislead. Seems clear our elected representatives are deaf to the objections raised so far. The time is nearing where It maybe necessary to test their eyesight with feet on the street, 80%+ is a big visual statement. The alternative is to allow this abuse of position, power and information to continue, it would also confirm to this council that they can do what they want because we as residents have no voice and are a meaningless irritation. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -48

4:15pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Devils_advocate wrote:
pedalling paul wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.
agreed there is no evidence of global warming and this theory is dismissed by all recognised scientists.
[quote][p][bold]Devils_advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.[/p][/quote]agreed there is no evidence of global warming and this theory is dismissed by all recognised scientists. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -37

4:28pm Wed 12 Feb 14

york100 says...

What a disastrous policy in terms of damage to the reputation of York as a tourist-friendly destination. Separately, the Council is now seeking to raise money by catching motorists using designated bus lanes in the city yet motorists approaching Lendal Bridge from the station HAVE to use the marked bus lane in the hours that they are allowed to cross the bridge. Talk about confusing!
What a disastrous policy in terms of damage to the reputation of York as a tourist-friendly destination. Separately, the Council is now seeking to raise money by catching motorists using designated bus lanes in the city yet motorists approaching Lendal Bridge from the station HAVE to use the marked bus lane in the hours that they are allowed to cross the bridge. Talk about confusing! york100
  • Score: -9

5:00pm Wed 12 Feb 14

yorkshirelad says...

Devils_advocate wrote:
pedalling paul wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.
This is, of course, nonsense. The overwhelming majority of scientists in the field think global warming is real, at least partially man-made and dangerous. Without exagerating, people who peddle the view that it isn't are the modern equivalent of people who thought the earth was flat.
[quote][p][bold]Devils_advocate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]Absolutely zero. The climate changes .... regardless of cars, planes, animals, people, etc. If none of them were here, the climate would still change.[/p][/quote]This is, of course, nonsense. The overwhelming majority of scientists in the field think global warming is real, at least partially man-made and dangerous. Without exagerating, people who peddle the view that it isn't are the modern equivalent of people who thought the earth was flat. yorkshirelad
  • Score: 38

5:06pm Wed 12 Feb 14

yorkshirelad says...

Remember the footstreets, the same sort of huff and puff and would we change back now? This definitely improves York and is the sort of thing small historic cities should be doing. The Press should be getting behind these sort of changes and not whipping up a storm with inflammatory headlines.
Of course the majority of folk commenting in a local newspaper are against it - let's face it, not a bunch renowned for forward thinking. But the Poll neatly splits 'for' vote to make the majority look even bigger.
Once we have all spluttered and thrown our toys out of the pram, we will wonder what all the fuss was about...
Signage, fines, education, alternatives all need looking at, but the fundamental idea that the cities we live in are essentially spoilt by (mostly non-essential) traffic is the right one.
Remember the footstreets, the same sort of huff and puff and would we change back now? This definitely improves York and is the sort of thing small historic cities should be doing. The Press should be getting behind these sort of changes and not whipping up a storm with inflammatory headlines. Of course the majority of folk commenting in a local newspaper are against it - let's face it, not a bunch renowned for forward thinking. But the Poll neatly splits 'for' vote to make the majority look even bigger. Once we have all spluttered and thrown our toys out of the pram, we will wonder what all the fuss was about... Signage, fines, education, alternatives all need looking at, but the fundamental idea that the cities we live in are essentially spoilt by (mostly non-essential) traffic is the right one. yorkshirelad
  • Score: 49

5:15pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Caecilius says...

If motorists really can't see and/or comprehend the prominent black-on-yellow signs round Bootham Bar, they must be blind, illiterate or half-witted. But more likely they're either paying no attention whatever, or see them but don't give a toss - like the driver who came out of Gillygate through the red light at the same junction this morning.
If motorists really can't see and/or comprehend the prominent black-on-yellow signs round Bootham Bar, they must be blind, illiterate or half-witted. But more likely they're either paying no attention whatever, or see them but don't give a toss - like the driver who came out of Gillygate through the red light at the same junction this morning. Caecilius
  • Score: 31

5:18pm Wed 12 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

yorkshirelad wrote:
Remember the footstreets, the same sort of huff and puff and would we change back now? This definitely improves York and is the sort of thing small historic cities should be doing. The Press should be getting behind these sort of changes and not whipping up a storm with inflammatory headlines.
Of course the majority of folk commenting in a local newspaper are against it - let's face it, not a bunch renowned for forward thinking. But the Poll neatly splits 'for' vote to make the majority look even bigger.
Once we have all spluttered and thrown our toys out of the pram, we will wonder what all the fuss was about...
Signage, fines, education, alternatives all need looking at, but the fundamental idea that the cities we live in are essentially spoilt by (mostly non-essential) traffic is the right one.
I agree close every bridge, go for broke we all know you are correct.
[quote][p][bold]yorkshirelad[/bold] wrote: Remember the footstreets, the same sort of huff and puff and would we change back now? This definitely improves York and is the sort of thing small historic cities should be doing. The Press should be getting behind these sort of changes and not whipping up a storm with inflammatory headlines. Of course the majority of folk commenting in a local newspaper are against it - let's face it, not a bunch renowned for forward thinking. But the Poll neatly splits 'for' vote to make the majority look even bigger. Once we have all spluttered and thrown our toys out of the pram, we will wonder what all the fuss was about... Signage, fines, education, alternatives all need looking at, but the fundamental idea that the cities we live in are essentially spoilt by (mostly non-essential) traffic is the right one.[/p][/quote]I agree close every bridge, go for broke we all know you are correct. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -48

5:32pm Wed 12 Feb 14

jake777 says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..[/p][/quote]coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life. jake777
  • Score: 55

5:50pm Wed 12 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Wrong Planet wrote:
A quick glance at the sign pictured above shows exactly how inadequate the signs are.
'Lendal Bridge, Restricted Access, 10:30am to 5pm, August 27th'
It is now February 11th so the bridge is not closed according to the sign
another one that can't read signs, and you still have it wrong as it is the 27th of Feb that is six month.
[quote][p][bold]Wrong Planet[/bold] wrote: A quick glance at the sign pictured above shows exactly how inadequate the signs are. 'Lendal Bridge, Restricted Access, 10:30am to 5pm, August 27th' It is now February 11th so the bridge is not closed according to the sign[/p][/quote]another one that can't read signs, and you still have it wrong as it is the 27th of Feb that is six month. jake777
  • Score: 32

6:05pm Wed 12 Feb 14

jake777 says...

JHardacre wrote:
"When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off."

I don't. I assume that it's for traffic that previously came across a sign saying Road Closed - Follow Diversion. If I hadn't seen such a sign I would naturally assume it did not apply to me.
another one who thinks that because his/her name isn't on the sign, it does not mean them. if a sign is there its for a reason.
[quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: "When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off." I don't. I assume that it's for traffic that previously came across a sign saying Road Closed - Follow Diversion. If I hadn't seen such a sign I would naturally assume it did not apply to me.[/p][/quote]another one who thinks that because his/her name isn't on the sign, it does not mean them. if a sign is there its for a reason. jake777
  • Score: 50

6:14pm Wed 12 Feb 14

RoseD says...

Turnedoutniceagain wrote:
Never bothered voting in local elections before. I will be from now on.
Think I might even photocopy my voting card a few thousand times.
Hahahahaha!! THANK you, my laugh for the day. If it works for The Press Hacker.........
[quote][p][bold]Turnedoutniceagain[/bold] wrote: Never bothered voting in local elections before. I will be from now on. Think I might even photocopy my voting card a few thousand times.[/p][/quote]Hahahahaha!! THANK you, my laugh for the day. If it works for The Press Hacker......... RoseD
  • Score: -20

6:17pm Wed 12 Feb 14

RoseD says...

jake777 wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.
Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river?

And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..[/p][/quote]coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.[/p][/quote]Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river? And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise........... RoseD
  • Score: -84

6:27pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Rosieposie says...

****, got caught.. Never drive into town normally but on residents free parkign day I was so hacked off at going round marygate for an hour trying to find a spoy I decided to go to Castle Mills, completly forgetting the bridge...so tosay a pic of me driving across. Actually why is it not open on the weekends.....either way well cross. And I knew about it but didnt notice the signs and mocked folk who had been caught..so its easy to get done
****, got caught.. Never drive into town normally but on residents free parkign day I was so hacked off at going round marygate for an hour trying to find a spoy I decided to go to Castle Mills, completly forgetting the bridge...so tosay a pic of me driving across. Actually why is it not open on the weekends.....either way well cross. And I knew about it but didnt notice the signs and mocked folk who had been caught..so its easy to get done Rosieposie
  • Score: -70

6:27pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Rosieposie says...

****, got caught.. Never drive into town normally but on residents free parkign day I was so hacked off at going round marygate for an hour trying to find a spoy I decided to go to Castle Mills, completly forgetting the bridge...so tosay a pic of me driving across. Actually why is it not open on the weekends.....either way well cross. And I knew about it but didnt notice the signs and mocked folk who had been caught..so its easy to get done
****, got caught.. Never drive into town normally but on residents free parkign day I was so hacked off at going round marygate for an hour trying to find a spoy I decided to go to Castle Mills, completly forgetting the bridge...so tosay a pic of me driving across. Actually why is it not open on the weekends.....either way well cross. And I knew about it but didnt notice the signs and mocked folk who had been caught..so its easy to get done Rosieposie
  • Score: -72

6:48pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Dave Ruddock says...

Just the one thing that bugs me, DRivers try doing driving with eyes not Sat Nav,igns are CLEAR TO SEE as long as thay all look out the windscreen. What do they wand BRIGHT FLOURESENT YELLOW WITH RED FLASHING LIGHTS. 10 feet high . drivers pack it in
Just the one thing that bugs me, DRivers try doing driving with eyes not Sat Nav,igns are CLEAR TO SEE as long as thay all look out the windscreen. What do they wand BRIGHT FLOURESENT YELLOW WITH RED FLASHING LIGHTS. 10 feet high . drivers pack it in Dave Ruddock
  • Score: -33

7:35pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Kelvar says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?
This is the worst weather recorded for 172 years, so what are we blaming 172 years ago, horse **** ?.

Even if the weather was directly attributable to the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, it would take a total fool to believe the solution was to make them drive further for longer.

The opinion poll at the top of the page is a great insight currently:

Abandon = 83%
Extend = 6%
Maintain = 11%

However it will be hacked later because it does not represent the outcome a certain small group has already decided upon. Only a group with direct connection to this trial would invest the time and effort to feebly attempt to mislead.

Seems clear our elected representatives are deaf to the objections raised so far. The time is nearing where It maybe necessary to test their eyesight with feet on the street, 80%+ is a big visual statement.
The alternative is to allow this abuse of position, power and information to continue, it would also confirm to this council that they can do what they want because we as residents have no voice and are a meaningless irritation.
Had to laugh when I signed in "later' - It has been hacked....wish I could upload the 'Snip' (screen print to the uninitiated I took when I signed in) it is now showing:

Abandoned: 42%
Extended: 2%
Maintained: 56%

I really, REALLY wish we had a 'Recall' option to VOTE THIS COUNCIL OUT!!! I await the negative votes with a can of Laughing Gas at my side!!
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: To what extent has the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, contributed down the years to the climate change consequences that are now battering parts of our country?[/p][/quote]This is the worst weather recorded for 172 years, so what are we blaming 172 years ago, horse **** ?. Even if the weather was directly attributable to the extensive use of private cars in towns and cities, it would take a total fool to believe the solution was to make them drive further for longer. The opinion poll at the top of the page is a great insight currently: Abandon = 83% Extend = 6% Maintain = 11% However it will be hacked later because it does not represent the outcome a certain small group has already decided upon. Only a group with direct connection to this trial would invest the time and effort to feebly attempt to mislead. Seems clear our elected representatives are deaf to the objections raised so far. The time is nearing where It maybe necessary to test their eyesight with feet on the street, 80%+ is a big visual statement. The alternative is to allow this abuse of position, power and information to continue, it would also confirm to this council that they can do what they want because we as residents have no voice and are a meaningless irritation.[/p][/quote]Had to laugh when I signed in "later' - It has been hacked....wish I could upload the 'Snip' (screen print to the uninitiated I took when I signed in) it is now showing: Abandoned: 42% Extended: 2% Maintained: 56% I really, REALLY wish we had a 'Recall' option to VOTE THIS COUNCIL OUT!!! I await the negative votes with a can of Laughing Gas at my side!! Kelvar
  • Score: -27

7:39pm Wed 12 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

HaHaHa. The mark-down mongrel has adjusted the press poll to reflect the intended outcome.

One result you will not be able to interfere with or fiddle is the wave of protest that is is growing day by day.

Enjoy it while you can, woof, woof.
HaHaHa. The mark-down mongrel has adjusted the press poll to reflect the intended outcome. One result you will not be able to interfere with or fiddle is the wave of protest that is is growing day by day. Enjoy it while you can, woof, woof. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -22

7:46pm Wed 12 Feb 14

JasBro says...

Ah, I see the council vote riggers have finally taken action.

The votes in the poll from us ordinary residents of York have been running at 84-89% against all day. Only 11-16% in favour.

Now suddenly, like all the comment votes of recent times, it's been fixed.

Oh dear. It's so predictable and so obvious. Within an hour it's jumped to 59% in favour, 41% against. Totally dishonest.

The worst thing is that the same methods will be being used to rig the council's online surveys.

Do the Press and the council have no shame? I guess the answer is obviously not.
Ah, I see the council vote riggers have finally taken action. The votes in the poll from us ordinary residents of York have been running at 84-89% against all day. Only 11-16% in favour. Now suddenly, like all the comment votes of recent times, it's been fixed. Oh dear. It's so predictable and so obvious. Within an hour it's jumped to 59% in favour, 41% against. Totally dishonest. The worst thing is that the same methods will be being used to rig the council's online surveys. Do the Press and the council have no shame? I guess the answer is obviously not. JasBro
  • Score: -57

7:52pm Wed 12 Feb 14

whitehorse says...

I suggest that all of us that have noticed this hacker try and record as much evidence of his work as we can. Then we can forward it to the Press complaints commission as a blatant attempt to force their opinion onto a readership that is strongly in disagreement,

Hacker- look- you'll need to get rid of this before the idea catches on. PRESS COMPLAINTS COMMISSION.

Join the campaign. Let's ditch the manipulative cretins.
I suggest that all of us that have noticed this hacker try and record as much evidence of his work as we can. Then we can forward it to the Press complaints commission as a blatant attempt to force their opinion onto a readership that is strongly in disagreement, Hacker- look- you'll need to get rid of this before the idea catches on. PRESS COMPLAINTS COMMISSION. Join the campaign. Let's ditch the manipulative cretins. whitehorse
  • Score: -48

7:56pm Wed 12 Feb 14

whitehorse says...

From the editors code:
' Whenever the public interest is invoked, the PCC will require editors to demonstrate fully that they reasonably believed that publication, or journalistic activity undertaken with a view to publication, would be in the public interest and how, and with whom, that was established at the time'.

Changing the results of instant polls and surveys fails fundamentally to respond to the public interest- as does deleting this post as is surely about to happen.

I'll email the PCC directly once this goes missing.
From the editors code: ' Whenever the public interest is invoked, the PCC will require editors to demonstrate fully that they reasonably believed that publication, or journalistic activity undertaken with a view to publication, would be in the public interest and how, and with whom, that was established at the time'. Changing the results of instant polls and surveys fails fundamentally to respond to the public interest- as does deleting this post as is surely about to happen. I'll email the PCC directly once this goes missing. whitehorse
  • Score: -38

7:58pm Wed 12 Feb 14

JasBro says...

whitehorse wrote:
I suggest that all of us that have noticed this hacker try and record as much evidence of his work as we can. Then we can forward it to the Press complaints commission as a blatant attempt to force their opinion onto a readership that is strongly in disagreement,

Hacker- look- you'll need to get rid of this before the idea catches on. PRESS COMPLAINTS COMMISSION.

Join the campaign. Let's ditch the manipulative cretins.
Don't forget the Local Government Ombudsman.

The same methods that have been used to manipulate this site can, and almost certainly will have been used to fix the council's surveys.
[quote][p][bold]whitehorse[/bold] wrote: I suggest that all of us that have noticed this hacker try and record as much evidence of his work as we can. Then we can forward it to the Press complaints commission as a blatant attempt to force their opinion onto a readership that is strongly in disagreement, Hacker- look- you'll need to get rid of this before the idea catches on. PRESS COMPLAINTS COMMISSION. Join the campaign. Let's ditch the manipulative cretins.[/p][/quote]Don't forget the Local Government Ombudsman. The same methods that have been used to manipulate this site can, and almost certainly will have been used to fix the council's surveys. JasBro
  • Score: -48

8:01pm Wed 12 Feb 14

JasBro says...

Now 67% against, 33% in favour.

Big effort being put in by the scarlet pimple.
Now 67% against, 33% in favour. Big effort being put in by the scarlet pimple. JasBro
  • Score: -2

8:20pm Wed 12 Feb 14

JasBro says...

Now 71% in favour, 29% against.

In just an hour or so the result of the poll has been made meaningless.

The press will love it, more hits on their site, more advertising revenue. The council will be happy, they're not interested in democracy or transparency or fairness.

The fact that it's dishonest manipulation won't bother either of them.
Now 71% in favour, 29% against. In just an hour or so the result of the poll has been made meaningless. The press will love it, more hits on their site, more advertising revenue. The council will be happy, they're not interested in democracy or transparency or fairness. The fact that it's dishonest manipulation won't bother either of them. JasBro
  • Score: -74

8:21pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Kelvar says...

At 20:17, 12/02/2014 - the count now stands at

Abandon: 29%
Extended: 2%
Maintained: 69%

My, my, Busy, BUSY little hacker! (screen shot taken)
At 20:17, 12/02/2014 - the count now stands at Abandon: 29% Extended: 2% Maintained: 69% My, my, Busy, BUSY little hacker! (screen shot taken) Kelvar
  • Score: -86

9:20pm Wed 12 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Change what you want to represent your false projects.

York residents are not going to accept a 3rd rate incomplete traffic system to enable you to progress your vanity follies.
Change what you want to represent your false projects. York residents are not going to accept a 3rd rate incomplete traffic system to enable you to progress your vanity follies. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -34

9:33pm Wed 12 Feb 14

WhyEver says...

The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this?

Abandoned: 18%
Extended: 1%
Maintained: 81%

Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...
The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this? Abandoned: 18% Extended: 1% Maintained: 81% Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it... WhyEver
  • Score: -16

10:26pm Wed 12 Feb 14

JHardacre says...

jake777 wrote:
JHardacre wrote:
"When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off."

I don't. I assume that it's for traffic that previously came across a sign saying Road Closed - Follow Diversion. If I hadn't seen such a sign I would naturally assume it did not apply to me.
another one who thinks that because his/her name isn't on the sign, it does not mean them. if a sign is there its for a reason.
Did you read what I actually said?
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: "When you're at the traffic lights, you cans ee there is a big arrow on the sign which says "diverted traffic" and the arrow pointing right. Now call me old fashioned, but if I'm at a junction and I see a sign saying "diverted traffic" with an arrow pointing away from the route I'm about to take, I generally think that maybe the route I'm about to take might be closed off." I don't. I assume that it's for traffic that previously came across a sign saying Road Closed - Follow Diversion. If I hadn't seen such a sign I would naturally assume it did not apply to me.[/p][/quote]another one who thinks that because his/her name isn't on the sign, it does not mean them. if a sign is there its for a reason.[/p][/quote]Did you read what I actually said? JHardacre
  • Score: -48

1:18am Thu 13 Feb 14

john655 says...

WhyEver wrote:
The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this?

Abandoned: 18%
Extended: 1%
Maintained: 81%

Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...
unfortunately due to this hacker this is what the press will print giving the people of York a altered view of what the public really think
[quote][p][bold]WhyEver[/bold] wrote: The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this? Abandoned: 18% Extended: 1% Maintained: 81% Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...[/p][/quote]unfortunately due to this hacker this is what the press will print giving the people of York a altered view of what the public really think john655
  • Score: -16

3:03am Thu 13 Feb 14

Magicman! says...

old_geezer wrote:
"No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles" (Magicman) - yes, simple and clear. The bureaucratic huffing about the initial rubbish signage being "compliant with DfT guidelines" is a good example of tick-box mentality, hence why there is now extra signage including the mobile electronic display at Station Rise, with more planned.
What amuses me is that I see drivers on Station Avenue look at the big electronic display, complete with its LED pointing arrow which points to the direction of the closed road, and then they carry on and drive over the bridge!
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: "No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles" (Magicman) - yes, simple and clear. The bureaucratic huffing about the initial rubbish signage being "compliant with DfT guidelines" is a good example of tick-box mentality, hence why there is now extra signage including the mobile electronic display at Station Rise, with more planned.[/p][/quote]What amuses me is that I see drivers on Station Avenue look at the big electronic display, complete with its LED pointing arrow which points to the direction of the closed road, and then they carry on and drive over the bridge! Magicman!
  • Score: -44

3:10am Thu 13 Feb 14

Magicman! says...

yorkboy wrote:
Well I hate this whole closing lendal bridge thing! But what gets me as someone who lives next to the station my life would be so much easier if I could cross the bridge but instead I spend hours sat in traffic on other routes, for people to blindly use lendal bridge and get let off fines!!! One rule for one and one for another, shall we all just use the bridge again?!
Those who get let off are because they have a very bullish solicitor on their side... these are the same sort of people who get fined for speeding at 90mph and then try to say "the policeman didn't have his hat on so I should be let off the fine for driving like an ar$ehole".

I think that if the bridge closure remains than there should be a permit system devised for locals who have a real need to use the bridge - if you live in Tanner Row and work at the Hospital, for example, then ideally you'd be able to apply for a permit (renewed annually) whereby you provide evidence of your residence and place of employment, and evidence of why using a motor vehicle is compulsory, and you are then granted 2 bridge crossings per day. It would only be a small number of people who'd be eligable for permits, those who live within 100-200 yards of the bridge and whos workplace is a similar distance away on the other side of the bridge and whereby the bridge is the primary route to commute.

I personally would authorise motor cycles to use the bridge, as they do not cause congestion in the way private cars do.
[quote][p][bold]yorkboy[/bold] wrote: Well I hate this whole closing lendal bridge thing! But what gets me as someone who lives next to the station my life would be so much easier if I could cross the bridge but instead I spend hours sat in traffic on other routes, for people to blindly use lendal bridge and get let off fines!!! One rule for one and one for another, shall we all just use the bridge again?![/p][/quote]Those who get let off are because they have a very bullish solicitor on their side... these are the same sort of people who get fined for speeding at 90mph and then try to say "the policeman didn't have his hat on so I should be let off the fine for driving like an ar$ehole". I think that if the bridge closure remains than there should be a permit system devised for locals who have a real need to use the bridge - if you live in Tanner Row and work at the Hospital, for example, then ideally you'd be able to apply for a permit (renewed annually) whereby you provide evidence of your residence and place of employment, and evidence of why using a motor vehicle is compulsory, and you are then granted 2 bridge crossings per day. It would only be a small number of people who'd be eligable for permits, those who live within 100-200 yards of the bridge and whos workplace is a similar distance away on the other side of the bridge and whereby the bridge is the primary route to commute. I personally would authorise motor cycles to use the bridge, as they do not cause congestion in the way private cars do. Magicman!
  • Score: -35

8:44am Thu 13 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

Magicman! wrote:
old_geezer wrote:
"No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles" (Magicman) - yes, simple and clear. The bureaucratic huffing about the initial rubbish signage being "compliant with DfT guidelines" is a good example of tick-box mentality, hence why there is now extra signage including the mobile electronic display at Station Rise, with more planned.
What amuses me is that I see drivers on Station Avenue look at the big electronic display, complete with its LED pointing arrow which points to the direction of the closed road, and then they carry on and drive over the bridge!
Not been in the area since the signs were uprated, but gut feeling tells me that it might be better to have the LED arrow pointing AWAY from the restriction, as in "GO THIS WAY" - if you are driving a bus or a vehicle with blue lights switched on you will obviously know it doesn't apply to you - and if you are driving anything else on the "approved" list; nobody cars in the slightest if you go the long way.
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: "No Entry, 7am-7pm except authorised vehicles" (Magicman) - yes, simple and clear. The bureaucratic huffing about the initial rubbish signage being "compliant with DfT guidelines" is a good example of tick-box mentality, hence why there is now extra signage including the mobile electronic display at Station Rise, with more planned.[/p][/quote]What amuses me is that I see drivers on Station Avenue look at the big electronic display, complete with its LED pointing arrow which points to the direction of the closed road, and then they carry on and drive over the bridge![/p][/quote]Not been in the area since the signs were uprated, but gut feeling tells me that it might be better to have the LED arrow pointing AWAY from the restriction, as in "GO THIS WAY" - if you are driving a bus or a vehicle with blue lights switched on you will obviously know it doesn't apply to you - and if you are driving anything else on the "approved" list; nobody cars in the slightest if you go the long way. Mulgrave
  • Score: -43

8:54am Thu 13 Feb 14

again says...

john655 wrote:
WhyEver wrote:
The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this?

Abandoned: 18%
Extended: 1%
Maintained: 81%

Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...
unfortunately due to this hacker this is what the press will print giving the people of York a altered view of what the public really think
The situation is not dissimilar to when Durham, another historic northern city, introduced the country's first toll road in 2002.

" is the only public access road leading to the World Heritage Site of Durham Cathedral and Durham Castle Prior to the introduction of the congestion charge around 3000 vehicles used the road on a daily basis."

Since then the scheme appears to have benefitted the city and aroused very little antagonism from would-be tourists!
[quote][p][bold]john655[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WhyEver[/bold] wrote: The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this? Abandoned: 18% Extended: 1% Maintained: 81% Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...[/p][/quote]unfortunately due to this hacker this is what the press will print giving the people of York a altered view of what the public really think[/p][/quote]The situation is not dissimilar to when Durham, another historic northern city, introduced the country's first toll road in 2002. " [Saddler Street] is the only public access road leading to the World Heritage Site of Durham Cathedral and Durham Castle Prior to the introduction of the congestion charge around 3000 vehicles used the road on a daily basis." Since then the scheme appears to have benefitted the city and aroused very little antagonism from would-be tourists! again
  • Score: -43

9:00am Thu 13 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

again wrote:
john655 wrote:
WhyEver wrote:
The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this?

Abandoned: 18%
Extended: 1%
Maintained: 81%

Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...
unfortunately due to this hacker this is what the press will print giving the people of York a altered view of what the public really think
The situation is not dissimilar to when Durham, another historic northern city, introduced the country's first toll road in 2002.

" is the only public access road leading to the World Heritage Site of Durham Cathedral and Durham Castle Prior to the introduction of the congestion charge around 3000 vehicles used the road on a daily basis."

Since then the scheme appears to have benefitted the city and aroused very little antagonism from would-be tourists!
Says the person who thinks a Land Rover Defender is a silly vanity purchase - for a tree surgeon!
[quote][p][bold]again[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]john655[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WhyEver[/bold] wrote: The Press clearly doesn't care that they are being used to spread lies about the popularity of this bridge closure. I wonder what Gavin Aitchison & Neil Johnston feel about their names being put on this? Abandoned: 18% Extended: 1% Maintained: 81% Still, it's distracting us from the real problems with the closure, isn't it...[/p][/quote]unfortunately due to this hacker this is what the press will print giving the people of York a altered view of what the public really think[/p][/quote]The situation is not dissimilar to when Durham, another historic northern city, introduced the country's first toll road in 2002. " [Saddler Street] is the only public access road leading to the World Heritage Site of Durham Cathedral and Durham Castle Prior to the introduction of the congestion charge around 3000 vehicles used the road on a daily basis." Since then the scheme appears to have benefitted the city and aroused very little antagonism from would-be tourists![/p][/quote]Says the person who thinks a Land Rover Defender is a silly vanity purchase - for a tree surgeon! Mulgrave
  • Score: -46

9:25am Thu 13 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

They didn't close a bridge in Durham !
They didn't close a bridge in Durham ! tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -31

9:44am Thu 13 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Amusing thing whoever is manipulating the poll (Nb it isn't hacking, that's something completely different) is moving the wrong bar for their agenda. Shows the level of intelligence we are working with...
Amusing thing whoever is manipulating the poll (Nb it isn't hacking, that's something completely different) is moving the wrong bar for their agenda. Shows the level of intelligence we are working with... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -38

10:00am Thu 13 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

how can someone even be bothered to change all the votes and scoring buttons... i know some people dont have a life but this takes it to a whole new level... buy flappy bird or something or even try getting out of the house you sad ba@t#rd.
how can someone even be bothered to change all the votes and scoring buttons... i know some people dont have a life but this takes it to a whole new level... buy flappy bird or something or even try getting out of the house you sad ba@t#rd. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -24

10:26am Thu 13 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

2 very good features today inviting folks to come to York in the half term.
I can give them 1.3 million reasons to give the place a miss.
2 very good features today inviting folks to come to York in the half term. I can give them 1.3 million reasons to give the place a miss. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -31

10:52am Thu 13 Feb 14

Bo Jolly says...

The Press has corrected the poll results by excluding multiple results from the same computer: "The poll result above shows the result based on votes from distinct users."

So, as of 10.45 Thursday morning the results are 82% in favour of abandoning the 'trial' (instead of 85% in favour of keeping it, courtesy of the naughty voting monkey), returning roughly to the proportions they were before the rigger got to work last night.

Well done Press for standing up to political manipulation - can you sort out the abuse of the comment voting now?
The Press has corrected the poll results by excluding multiple results from the same computer: "The poll result above shows the result based on votes from distinct users." So, as of 10.45 Thursday morning the results are 82% in favour of abandoning the 'trial' (instead of 85% in favour of keeping it, courtesy of the naughty voting monkey), returning roughly to the proportions they were before the rigger got to work last night. Well done Press for standing up to political manipulation - can you sort out the abuse of the comment voting now? Bo Jolly
  • Score: -19

11:34am Thu 13 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

The mark-down mongrel must be gutted.

167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are.

Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.
The mark-down mongrel must be gutted. 167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are. Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -57

11:39am Thu 13 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
The mark-down mongrel must be gutted.

167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are.

Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.
Problem is that Lendal Bridge (and possibly E.Square) are the only ones that could be reversed now. At best it would be a cathartic experience for the less barking sections of York
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: The mark-down mongrel must be gutted. 167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are. Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.[/p][/quote]Problem is that Lendal Bridge (and possibly E.Square) are the only ones that could be reversed now. At best it would be a cathartic experience for the less barking sections of York AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -33

11:51am Thu 13 Feb 14

Jorvik1980 says...

The council say they have issued signs around the city, that will be why they say AA on them then.
The council say they have issued signs around the city, that will be why they say AA on them then. Jorvik1980
  • Score: -32

11:53am Thu 13 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
The mark-down mongrel must be gutted.

167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are.

Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.
Problem is that Lendal Bridge (and possibly E.Square) are the only ones that could be reversed now. At best it would be a cathartic experience for the less barking sections of York
I agree, that one issue has progressed and is beyond reversal or worth stopping now. However in my opinion it is good to remind some people of decisions that they have taken that were contrary to public opinion.

I consider many people rather more practical than emotional on the remaining issues, York is being delivered a 3rd rate incomplete transport system with little if any perceivable benefit.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: The mark-down mongrel must be gutted. 167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are. Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.[/p][/quote]Problem is that Lendal Bridge (and possibly E.Square) are the only ones that could be reversed now. At best it would be a cathartic experience for the less barking sections of York[/p][/quote]I agree, that one issue has progressed and is beyond reversal or worth stopping now. However in my opinion it is good to remind some people of decisions that they have taken that were contrary to public opinion. I consider many people rather more practical than emotional on the remaining issues, York is being delivered a 3rd rate incomplete transport system with little if any perceivable benefit. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -29

12:02pm Thu 13 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
The mark-down mongrel must be gutted.

167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are.

Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.
Problem is that Lendal Bridge (and possibly E.Square) are the only ones that could be reversed now. At best it would be a cathartic experience for the less barking sections of York
I agree, that one issue has progressed and is beyond reversal or worth stopping now. However in my opinion it is good to remind some people of decisions that they have taken that were contrary to public opinion.

I consider many people rather more practical than emotional on the remaining issues, York is being delivered a 3rd rate incomplete transport system with little if any perceivable benefit.
Irony is that i have far more issues with the 20mph stuff than Lendal bridge. The former will waste far more of my time compared to the rare time I cross Lendal.
However there is little point moaning about it as it is a done deal, one woman's vendetta wastes an astronomical amount of time when everyone's delays are added up. Sadly she can't see beyond her narrow minded blinkered view.
I wish people would understand that most of York use cars to get from A to B in a way that is a country mile easier and quicker. Not all of us want to bike 10+ miles twice a day etc...
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: The mark-down mongrel must be gutted. 167% distortion of genuine opinion and all wasted time. Really shows up the ratings for comments and how distorted they are. Well done press, it would be nice to see more extensive use of polls for things like Exhibition Square, Kings Square, 20MPH. An indication of public opinion of Labours approval rating would be good given 15 months to the local elections.[/p][/quote]Problem is that Lendal Bridge (and possibly E.Square) are the only ones that could be reversed now. At best it would be a cathartic experience for the less barking sections of York[/p][/quote]I agree, that one issue has progressed and is beyond reversal or worth stopping now. However in my opinion it is good to remind some people of decisions that they have taken that were contrary to public opinion. I consider many people rather more practical than emotional on the remaining issues, York is being delivered a 3rd rate incomplete transport system with little if any perceivable benefit.[/p][/quote]Irony is that i have far more issues with the 20mph stuff than Lendal bridge. The former will waste far more of my time compared to the rare time I cross Lendal. However there is little point moaning about it as it is a done deal, one woman's vendetta wastes an astronomical amount of time when everyone's delays are added up. Sadly she can't see beyond her narrow minded blinkered view. I wish people would understand that most of York use cars to get from A to B in a way that is a country mile easier and quicker. Not all of us want to bike 10+ miles twice a day etc... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -30

12:13pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Ignatius Lumpopo says...

42,800 penalty charges?
£1,300,000?
108 comments?
913 likes?

Nah. Someone must be cheating SOME of these figures, surely.
42,800 penalty charges? £1,300,000? 108 comments? 913 likes? Nah. Someone must be cheating SOME of these figures, surely. Ignatius Lumpopo
  • Score: -36

12:27pm Thu 13 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

AGuyFromStrensall. I don't think we can separate any of the restrictive actions on transport in York. They are all part of the same master plan which has been drip-fed, intentionally as separate issues but for one and only one conclusion.

What a situation residents of York find themselves in, a scenario that could be described as a perfect storm. Individual campaighners of isolated issues with similar biases converging at one point to inflict their ideologies regardless of consequence.

Fantasy-based ideologies invariably have neat happy endings where all the bad people and all the bad behavior go away. Personal motorised transport is here to stay for very good reasons.
AGuyFromStrensall. I don't think we can separate any of the restrictive actions on transport in York. They are all part of the same master plan which has been drip-fed, intentionally as separate issues but for one and only one conclusion. What a situation residents of York find themselves in, a scenario that could be described as a perfect storm. Individual campaighners of isolated issues with similar biases converging at one point to inflict their ideologies regardless of consequence. Fantasy-based ideologies invariably have neat happy endings where all the bad people and all the bad behavior go away. Personal motorised transport is here to stay for very good reasons. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -37

12:44pm Thu 13 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall. I don't think we can separate any of the restrictive actions on transport in York. They are all part of the same master plan which has been drip-fed, intentionally as separate issues but for one and only one conclusion.

What a situation residents of York find themselves in, a scenario that could be described as a perfect storm. Individual campaighners of isolated issues with similar biases converging at one point to inflict their ideologies regardless of consequence.

Fantasy-based ideologies invariably have neat happy endings where all the bad people and all the bad behavior go away. Personal motorised transport is here to stay for very good reasons.
I just am amazed that there is no one sat in these council meetings that doesn't pipe up with something along the lines of - "Wait a minute guys, I've just taken a step back and realised this is sheer madness". Surely there must be one rational person in the room who can see it from a view devoid of cycling/pedestrian/c
ar bias.
Or maybe there is and they get told to stand in the corner and think about what they have done.

I'm pretty sure that most of the wound up people on here are not the foaming at the mouth petrolheads that PP etc think they are.
They are just people who are making non-trivial journeys that would like to make the most of all that is availiable to them.
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: AGuyFromStrensall. I don't think we can separate any of the restrictive actions on transport in York. They are all part of the same master plan which has been drip-fed, intentionally as separate issues but for one and only one conclusion. What a situation residents of York find themselves in, a scenario that could be described as a perfect storm. Individual campaighners of isolated issues with similar biases converging at one point to inflict their ideologies regardless of consequence. Fantasy-based ideologies invariably have neat happy endings where all the bad people and all the bad behavior go away. Personal motorised transport is here to stay for very good reasons.[/p][/quote]I just am amazed that there is no one sat in these council meetings that doesn't pipe up with something along the lines of - "Wait a minute guys, I've just taken a step back and realised this is sheer madness". Surely there must be one rational person in the room who can see it from a view devoid of cycling/pedestrian/c ar bias. Or maybe there is and they get told to stand in the corner and think about what they have done. I'm pretty sure that most of the wound up people on here are not the foaming at the mouth petrolheads that PP etc think they are. They are just people who are making non-trivial journeys that would like to make the most of all that is availiable to them. AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -36

1:26pm Thu 13 Feb 14

WhyEver says...

Well done to the Press for repairing the votes in the poll above.
Well done to the Press for repairing the votes in the poll above. WhyEver
  • Score: -16

6:13pm Thu 13 Feb 14

JasBro says...

Well done to the Press for undoing the fixed votes.

I wonder if there will be a repeat performance tonight?
Well done to the Press for undoing the fixed votes. I wonder if there will be a repeat performance tonight? JasBro
  • Score: -32

7:02pm Thu 13 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

DfT (Department for Transport).
Changes have also been made in relation to the consultation requirements for permanent traffic orders. The statutory duty to consult the police in relation to all permanent traffic orders, whether made by LA or HA remains. We have also added a new statutory requirement to consult town or parish councils (plus district councils where applicable in two-tier areas) to both the Local Authorities and Secretary of State's regulations. We see this as being an essential democratic safeguard.

(We see this as being an essential democratic safeguard).

Talk to the parish councils, they are an important aspect in this process. My guess is that this council will be wanting to meet parish councils at short notice in small numbers ensuring they are un-informed. We should all make our representations to local parish councils and make them aware of public feeling and the weight of opposition.

Link:
https://www.gov.uk/g

overnment/uploads/sy

stem/uploads/attachm

ent_data/file/2665/a

nnex-a.pdf
DfT (Department for Transport). Changes have also been made in relation to the consultation requirements for permanent traffic orders. The statutory duty to consult the police in relation to all permanent traffic orders, whether made by LA or HA remains. We have also added a new statutory requirement to consult town or parish councils (plus district councils where applicable in two-tier areas) to both the Local Authorities and Secretary of State's regulations. We see this as being an essential democratic safeguard. (We see this as being an essential democratic safeguard). Talk to the parish councils, they are an important aspect in this process. My guess is that this council will be wanting to meet parish councils at short notice in small numbers ensuring they are un-informed. We should all make our representations to local parish councils and make them aware of public feeling and the weight of opposition. Link: https://www.gov.uk/g overnment/uploads/sy stem/uploads/attachm ent_data/file/2665/a nnex-a.pdf YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -23

8:21pm Thu 13 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Mark-down mongrel is out of control.

Go getem woof, woof.

Your wasting your time, people can read or do you have such a low opinion of others as to believe they only look at the manipulated scores, what a waster.

Guess what, the poll above that you failed miserably to manipulate is the one that will be in the printed press.
Mark-down mongrel is out of control. Go getem woof, woof. Your wasting your time, people can read or do you have such a low opinion of others as to believe they only look at the manipulated scores, what a waster. Guess what, the poll above that you failed miserably to manipulate is the one that will be in the printed press. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -14

8:44pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

At least they have got wise to that idiot jake777
At least they have got wise to that idiot jake777 Mulgrave
  • Score: -21

9:35pm Thu 13 Feb 14

wallman says...

will the councillors who wanted the bridge shut please stand and explain your decision, also about the 20 is plenty waste of time
will the councillors who wanted the bridge shut please stand and explain your decision, also about the 20 is plenty waste of time wallman
  • Score: -12

12:34pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Cheeky face says...

Sign at Theatre is still often obscured. The police agreed this on the 4th day of the trial. That was fed to the council- a reply/response must be due soon!

I hope the traffic penalty charge tribunal adjudicator due to look at siognage leading to Coppergate can also look at the signs re Lendal Bridge.

Some AA signs have been changed by substituting restricted access with closed! Yet Darren richardson says repeatedly the original signs were succinct!
Sign at Theatre is still often obscured. The police agreed this on the 4th day of the trial. That was fed to the council- a reply/response must be due soon! I hope the traffic penalty charge tribunal adjudicator due to look at siognage leading to Coppergate can also look at the signs re Lendal Bridge. Some AA signs have been changed by substituting restricted access with closed! Yet Darren richardson says repeatedly the original signs were succinct! Cheeky face
  • Score: -9

1:47pm Fri 14 Feb 14

meme says...

PLEASE COYC GET THIS RIGHT OR REOPEN IT UNTIL YOU CAN GET IT RIGHT
we all know you want it closed forever BUT if this has to happen then make sure you are not destroying York's reputation in the process
Do something now. patently despite protestations to the contrary signage is not working as the fines are stupendous and not to be expected if things were right as nobody deliberately is receiving them
SO PLEASE TAKE ACTION NOW BEFORE THE SPRING TOURIST SEASON STARTS
PLEASE COYC GET THIS RIGHT OR REOPEN IT UNTIL YOU CAN GET IT RIGHT we all know you want it closed forever BUT if this has to happen then make sure you are not destroying York's reputation in the process Do something now. patently despite protestations to the contrary signage is not working as the fines are stupendous and not to be expected if things were right as nobody deliberately is receiving them SO PLEASE TAKE ACTION NOW BEFORE THE SPRING TOURIST SEASON STARTS meme
  • Score: -8

6:17pm Fri 14 Feb 14

jake777 says...

RoseD wrote:
jake777 wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.
Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river?

And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........
grow up and get a life.
[quote][p][bold]RoseD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..[/p][/quote]coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.[/p][/quote]Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river? And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........[/p][/quote]grow up and get a life. jake777
  • Score: 12

7:05pm Fri 14 Feb 14

JasBro says...

So, 82% say abandon the trial.

Damning verdict for the council. Couldn't be clearer.
So, 82% say abandon the trial. Damning verdict for the council. Couldn't be clearer. JasBro
  • Score: -6

7:06pm Fri 14 Feb 14

JasBro says...

jake777 wrote:
RoseD wrote:
jake777 wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.
Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river?

And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........
grow up and get a life.
She's right, you're wrong. Get over it.
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RoseD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..[/p][/quote]coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.[/p][/quote]Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river? And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........[/p][/quote]grow up and get a life.[/p][/quote]She's right, you're wrong. Get over it. JasBro
  • Score: -11

7:17pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

JasBro wrote:
jake777 wrote:
RoseD wrote:
jake777 wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.
Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river?

And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........
grow up and get a life.
She's right, you're wrong. Get over it.
Jake's had a bad day on the van again! Just as well he can let off steam here, otherwise we would be reading about some terrible road rage incident.
[quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RoseD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..[/p][/quote]coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.[/p][/quote]Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river? And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........[/p][/quote]grow up and get a life.[/p][/quote]She's right, you're wrong. Get over it.[/p][/quote]Jake's had a bad day on the van again! Just as well he can let off steam here, otherwise we would be reading about some terrible road rage incident. Mulgrave
  • Score: -13

9:52pm Fri 14 Feb 14

SilentMajor I.T. says...

Are you men of your words, or merely men of words?
Are you men of your words, or merely men of words? SilentMajor I.T.
  • Score: -1

2:02pm Sat 15 Feb 14

pheonix1965 says...

SilentMajor I.T. wrote:
Are you men of your words, or merely men of words?
As a Visitor to the city I remember when my fine dropped through my letter box I could not believe it, I spent the day shopping as all visitors do and got a smack in the teeth when I saw the fine. I paid it early so it cost me £30. Needless to say I have never been back to York and I think the council owe me a massive apology for the stress and upset this has caused. There is no way in hell I will return to your City and you may have fined me £30 but you have lost so much more. I did my Christmas shopping last year in Durham City and so did a lot of my family. So enjoy your Dick Turpin rip off York Council, lets see how many people stop visiting.
[quote][p][bold]SilentMajor I.T.[/bold] wrote: Are you men of your words, or merely men of words?[/p][/quote]As a Visitor to the city I remember when my fine dropped through my letter box I could not believe it, I spent the day shopping as all visitors do and got a smack in the teeth when I saw the fine. I paid it early so it cost me £30. Needless to say I have never been back to York and I think the council owe me a massive apology for the stress and upset this has caused. There is no way in hell I will return to your City and you may have fined me £30 but you have lost so much more. I did my Christmas shopping last year in Durham City and so did a lot of my family. So enjoy your Dick Turpin rip off York Council, lets see how many people stop visiting. pheonix1965
  • Score: 10

2:20pm Sat 15 Feb 14

pheonix1965 says...

Justin7 wrote:
Great additional money for the City, mostly out of the tourists pockets, so no complaints here!
An interesting comment indeed but have you also thought about what will happen to the economy of York when more tourists like me stop visiting and spending our money or is it that you do not want our money ???
[quote][p][bold]Justin7[/bold] wrote: Great additional money for the City, mostly out of the tourists pockets, so no complaints here![/p][/quote]An interesting comment indeed but have you also thought about what will happen to the economy of York when more tourists like me stop visiting and spending our money or is it that you do not want our money ??? pheonix1965
  • Score: 9

8:10pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Mulgrave wrote:
JasBro wrote:
jake777 wrote:
RoseD wrote:
jake777 wrote:
mike.......durkin wrote:
wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..
coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.
Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river?

And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........
grow up and get a life.
She's right, you're wrong. Get over it.
Jake's had a bad day on the van again! Just as well he can let off steam here, otherwise we would be reading about some terrible road rage incident.
not a petrol head and dont do road rage doh.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JasBro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RoseD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: wot a cash cow......thay making i feel so sorry for thous ho come in to york and puting off drivers **** in to york and copper gate that shud change ther habit and keep road open we all pay road tax to go on them.theres no need for it..thay must be so fed up and not fear..[/p][/quote]coppergate has been restricted traffic for years so what is the problem with that get a life.[/p][/quote]Youre an idiot. Where exactly are we supposed to cross the river? And to the even BIGGER idiots who liken this closure of a Ring Road segment to Coney etc. Hey I got news for you. There isn't a river crossing ON Coney. There is no river running thru the Minster Quarter. Clowns. You MUST be No-Merrett in a clever disguise...........[/p][/quote]grow up and get a life.[/p][/quote]She's right, you're wrong. Get over it.[/p][/quote]Jake's had a bad day on the van again! Just as well he can let off steam here, otherwise we would be reading about some terrible road rage incident.[/p][/quote]not a petrol head and dont do road rage doh. jake777
  • Score: 32

8:15pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Mulgrave wrote:
At least they have got wise to that idiot jake777
no, ha ha.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: At least they have got wise to that idiot jake777[/p][/quote]no, ha ha. jake777
  • Score: 30

10:38am Mon 17 Feb 14

anistasia says...

Never understand why the council closed the bridge 50 years ago Clifton bridge was opened to ease traffic congestion in the city.50 years later when we have more traffic on the roads the council close a road.does not make sense and for weeks council saying it will improve bus times well Saturday press saying bus times have increased so that goes against what the council are saying.
Never understand why the council closed the bridge 50 years ago Clifton bridge was opened to ease traffic congestion in the city.50 years later when we have more traffic on the roads the council close a road.does not make sense and for weeks council saying it will improve bus times well Saturday press saying bus times have increased so that goes against what the council are saying. anistasia
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

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

I agree