Park&Ride journey times increase during Lendal Bridge trial

Buses traveling over Lendal Bridge in York

Buses traveling over Lendal Bridge in York

First published in News
Last updated
York Press: Photograph of the Author by , Political Reporter

JOURNEY times on seven of York’s ten Park&Ride routes have increased as the Lendal Bridge traffic trial continues – but traffic chiefs have claimed buses may actually be travelling faster than before the restrictions began.

Figures for the fifth month of the City of York Council experiment – which has banned private vehicles from the bridge for six-and-a-half hours a day – have also shown that, of nine major roads around the city, seven were busier in January than in the same month a year before.

Meanwhile, 5,436 fines were issued between December 29 and January 26, taking the total number of penalty charge notices handed out since the trial began to 46,230.

Studies of York’s five inbound and five outbound Park&Ride routes showed travel times had only improved on three journeys, from the centre of York to Rawcliffe Bar and both ways on the Askham Bar service.

A report by transport officials said none of the increases was “significant” and suggested Park&Ride schedules could be the main reason for hold-ups.

It said service timetables meant buses had to arrive at or leave destinations at set times, meaning overall journey times “may mask improvements” in the time spent travelling between stops.

The report also warned: “Unless the trial is made permanent and the scheduling of the buses is altered, it is not possible for the buses to take full advantage of the time savings being generated.”

Critics of the trial – which the council said would speed up bus times – have claimed it has not improved bus performance and there has been a lack of information from bus operators about its impact.

The six-month scheme started on August 27, but the restrictions will remain beyond the end of February while its performance is assessed and a decision taken on whether to make it permanent, abandon it or extend its hours.

The report said Foss Islands Road and Water End, at Clifton Bridge, were still seeing the largest increases in traffic, while volumes also rose in January on the Outer Ring Road’s bridge over the River Ouse and on Fulford Road and Shipton Road. Boroughbridge Road had the largest fall in traffic levels last month.

Comments (88)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:10am Sat 15 Feb 14

eeoodares says...

What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original!

Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?
What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original! Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars? eeoodares
  • Score: 39

10:10am Sat 15 Feb 14

SilentMajor I.T. says...

And you,,, you who will comment here. Are you merely a man of words, venting your spleen for a little textual glory. Or are you a man of your words? My word is my bond, nothing more, nothing less. I say ENOUGH, silent no more. But is there one amongst you who will follow his words?
And you,,, you who will comment here. Are you merely a man of words, venting your spleen for a little textual glory. Or are you a man of your words? My word is my bond, nothing more, nothing less. I say ENOUGH, silent no more. But is there one amongst you who will follow his words? SilentMajor I.T.
  • Score: 306

10:11am Sat 15 Feb 14

LibDem says...

The bus companies have pointedly failed to provide any auditable performance data on the effects that the closure are having on their normal "stage carriage" services. These carry 75% of passengers in York and have been as vulnerable as other traffic to increased congestion on the rest of the highway network.

The comments on Park and Rode make little sense. The journey time is the duration elapsing between the bus leaving the timing point and arriving at the Park and Rode site (and via versa). The layover time at the stop is irrelevant.

The Council should agree to lift the trial on 28th February. If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May.
The bus companies have pointedly failed to provide any auditable performance data on the effects that the closure are having on their normal "stage carriage" services. These carry 75% of passengers in York and have been as vulnerable as other traffic to increased congestion on the rest of the highway network. The comments on Park and Rode make little sense. The journey time is the duration elapsing between the bus leaving the timing point and arriving at the Park and Rode site (and via versa). The layover time at the stop is irrelevant. The Council should agree to lift the trial on 28th February. If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May. LibDem
  • Score: 1144

10:22am Sat 15 Feb 14

old_geezer says...

There's nothing convincing either way in what's quoted in the article, so presumably there's nothing convincing either way at all. As I've posted before, I'm a winner by all 4 modes (walking, cycling, bus, car) and obviously there are losers. I suspect winners don't tend to post much on here.
There's nothing convincing either way in what's quoted in the article, so presumably there's nothing convincing either way at all. As I've posted before, I'm a winner by all 4 modes (walking, cycling, bus, car) and obviously there are losers. I suspect winners don't tend to post much on here. old_geezer
  • Score: 322

11:32am Sat 15 Feb 14

AnotherPointofView says...

Hahahahahahahahahaha
ha.

Bus times increase, higher levels of traffic on Foss Islands, Water End, Clifton Bridge. Shock horror! There's nothing that wasn't predicted before the "trial" was started. End the farce now!

I'm sure these figures will be twisted by councillors Alexander, Merritt & co. to "proove" the closure is a success.

The trial is a failure. Just end it now.
Hahahahahahahahahaha ha. Bus times increase, higher levels of traffic on Foss Islands, Water End, Clifton Bridge. Shock horror! There's nothing that wasn't predicted before the "trial" was started. End the farce now! I'm sure these figures will be twisted by councillors Alexander, Merritt & co. to "proove" the closure is a success. The trial is a failure. Just end it now. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: 2200

11:34am Sat 15 Feb 14

AnotherPointofView says...

AnotherPointofView wrote:
Hahahahahahahahahaha

ha.

Bus times increase, higher levels of traffic on Foss Islands, Water End, Clifton Bridge. Shock horror! There's nothing that wasn't predicted before the "trial" was started. End the farce now!

I'm sure these figures will be twisted by councillors Alexander, Merritt & co. to "proove" the closure is a success.

The trial is a failure. Just end it now.
*prove* not proove. Whoops.
[quote][p][bold]AnotherPointofView[/bold] wrote: Hahahahahahahahahaha ha. Bus times increase, higher levels of traffic on Foss Islands, Water End, Clifton Bridge. Shock horror! There's nothing that wasn't predicted before the "trial" was started. End the farce now! I'm sure these figures will be twisted by councillors Alexander, Merritt & co. to "proove" the closure is a success. The trial is a failure. Just end it now.[/p][/quote]*prove* not proove. Whoops. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: 2157

12:10pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed. Mulgrave
  • Score: 1543

12:21pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Have to make a comment says...

Statistics can just about prove whatever you like.

FACT - Closure of bridge probably not made that much difference one way, or the other to bus times.

FACT - Other routes busier, not rocket science

FACT - Some visitors to York left with fines potentially putting them off returning.

FACT - Buses and old Taxis still crossing the bridge belching out fumes into our historic city air

No benefit to pedestrians lulled into a false sense of security with a "quieter bridge" then run over by a double decker

Whats improved?
Statistics can just about prove whatever you like. FACT - Closure of bridge probably not made that much difference one way, or the other to bus times. FACT - Other routes busier, not rocket science FACT - Some visitors to York left with fines potentially putting them off returning. FACT - Buses and old Taxis still crossing the bridge belching out fumes into our historic city air No benefit to pedestrians lulled into a false sense of security with a "quieter bridge" then run over by a double decker Whats improved? Have to make a comment
  • Score: 1194

1:06pm Sat 15 Feb 14

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

But hang on a minute.....

Merrett the ferret said in this very paper that bus times had reduced because of the closure.

Surely our councillors wouldn't be lying to us, would they?
But hang on a minute..... Merrett the ferret said in this very paper that bus times had reduced because of the closure. Surely our councillors wouldn't be lying to us, would they? NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: 848

1:10pm Sat 15 Feb 14

SteveSCA says...

"If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May".

An excellent idea. The cost would be a fraction of the amount that's been generated in fines. So on what grounds could they object to this?
"If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May". An excellent idea. The cost would be a fraction of the amount that's been generated in fines. So on what grounds could they object to this? SteveSCA
  • Score: 1063

1:18pm Sat 15 Feb 14

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

SteveSCA wrote:
"If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May".

An excellent idea. The cost would be a fraction of the amount that's been generated in fines. So on what grounds could they object to this?
On the grounds that they wouldn't get the answer that they want.
[quote][p][bold]SteveSCA[/bold] wrote: "If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May". An excellent idea. The cost would be a fraction of the amount that's been generated in fines. So on what grounds could they object to this?[/p][/quote]On the grounds that they wouldn't get the answer that they want. NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: 968

2:43pm Sat 15 Feb 14

nearlyman says...

................"Lie
s, damned lies, and statistics".........
.......
................"Lie s, damned lies, and statistics"......... ....... nearlyman
  • Score: 596

2:45pm Sat 15 Feb 14

chelk says...

The Council have been proved wrong again but they will not listen they will twist it to try to show that it is working. They cannot be trusted with our city
The Council have been proved wrong again but they will not listen they will twist it to try to show that it is working. They cannot be trusted with our city chelk
  • Score: 513

4:10pm Sat 15 Feb 14

chelk says...

See the Muppet who manipulates the scores is having a busy day
See the Muppet who manipulates the scores is having a busy day chelk
  • Score: 802

4:13pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Woody G Mellor says...

I see the Pathetic sad'o' is altering the likes and dislikes agin.

Get a life you sad prat, you are doing the pro-bridge closure brigade no favours by your immature actions.
I see the Pathetic sad'o' is altering the likes and dislikes agin. Get a life you sad prat, you are doing the pro-bridge closure brigade no favours by your immature actions. Woody G Mellor
  • Score: 622

4:34pm Sat 15 Feb 14

WhyEver says...

Less than two weeks to go on this badly planned, poorly implemented trial. The council keep saying it's not about raising money - how about proving it by suspending the fines during the assessment period?
Less than two weeks to go on this badly planned, poorly implemented trial. The council keep saying it's not about raising money - how about proving it by suspending the fines during the assessment period? WhyEver
  • Score: 581

5:35pm Sat 15 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I wonder if our score adjuster is getting even more desperate (nearly as desperate as the council judging by the rubbish above they have said to justify increased journey times) or the press are intervening?

I note that now comment has been made on the scores the scoring is more in line, perhaps a little exaggerated, (at least at the top) with what you would expect it to be with 80% of the population against the bridge closure. Well that is apart from the second comment - who would have scored it?

I wonder if "it" may be waiting for comments on scoring then adjusting them the other way to make it appear that people are saying the scores have been adjusted positively on any negative comments?

Is it the score adjuster or is it the press? Come on press let us know!
I wonder if our score adjuster is getting even more desperate (nearly as desperate as the council judging by the rubbish above they have said to justify increased journey times) or the press are intervening? I note that now comment has been made on the scores the scoring is more in line, perhaps a little exaggerated, (at least at the top) with what you would expect it to be with 80% of the population against the bridge closure. Well that is apart from the second comment - who would have scored it? I wonder if "it" may be waiting for comments on scoring then adjusting them the other way to make it appear that people are saying the scores have been adjusted positively on any negative comments? Is it the score adjuster or is it the press? Come on press let us know! strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 110

5:42pm Sat 15 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention.

I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.
Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention. I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 696

5:53pm Sat 15 Feb 14

yorkboy says...

So how about leeman road??? No mention yet the traffic counter is working! Over the last few weeks traffic has got worse, last night the queue from water end went back beyond the railway museum down leeman road! The one way system at the north end of leeman road is now even more traffic choked!! Delaying the many buses on leeman road! Its a complete joke! So the facts are close a bridge for tourists to walk over at the risk of been hit by a fast moving taxi or bus, whereas before traffic was slower and safer, in turn fine the tourists and p*** them off never to return!! Send all traffic onto roads where many people live, leeman road, foss islands, clifton green and shipton road, add delays to buses that use these roads! If they actually dualled the ring road people might use it! For example to go from thirsk to selby its quicker to still come through york! Water end carries around 25,000 cars a day which is shocking and many using it to avoid the A1237! Sort that first before closing bridges
So how about leeman road??? No mention yet the traffic counter is working! Over the last few weeks traffic has got worse, last night the queue from water end went back beyond the railway museum down leeman road! The one way system at the north end of leeman road is now even more traffic choked!! Delaying the many buses on leeman road! Its a complete joke! So the facts are close a bridge for tourists to walk over at the risk of been hit by a fast moving taxi or bus, whereas before traffic was slower and safer, in turn fine the tourists and p*** them off never to return!! Send all traffic onto roads where many people live, leeman road, foss islands, clifton green and shipton road, add delays to buses that use these roads! If they actually dualled the ring road people might use it! For example to go from thirsk to selby its quicker to still come through york! Water end carries around 25,000 cars a day which is shocking and many using it to avoid the A1237! Sort that first before closing bridges yorkboy
  • Score: 386

5:56pm Sat 15 Feb 14

tricky1992000 says...

Cars are on the road for 10 to 15 minutes more as they are forced to go round, where they could have gone through, the result is more traffic, congestion, delays, pollution and expense on behalf of the motorist.
Cars are on the road for 10 to 15 minutes more as they are forced to go round, where they could have gone through, the result is more traffic, congestion, delays, pollution and expense on behalf of the motorist. tricky1992000
  • Score: 780

6:01pm Sat 15 Feb 14

yorkboy says...

Also why not like has been said provide a lovely looking footbridge from the bus waiting area at the end of leeman road over the river and link it so people would walk over it from the station go over the river and through museum gardens, a controlled crossing near lendal bridge to let people cross safely from museum gardens to the city centre would make this a lovely almost traffic free entrance to York!! Oh yeah this will never happen as the council took a back handers off the buyer of the old council offices to create a traffic free street outside! About time they admitted it!
Also why not like has been said provide a lovely looking footbridge from the bus waiting area at the end of leeman road over the river and link it so people would walk over it from the station go over the river and through museum gardens, a controlled crossing near lendal bridge to let people cross safely from museum gardens to the city centre would make this a lovely almost traffic free entrance to York!! Oh yeah this will never happen as the council took a back handers off the buyer of the old council offices to create a traffic free street outside! About time they admitted it! yorkboy
  • Score: 960

6:14pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention.

I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.
I believe in being fair - it always was the case that Bootham was used as a traffic reservoir due to its relative length and nature, and it was the lesser evil to have the tail back there than an even worse situation on the feeder routes into Gillygate. It is logical that if there is less traffic heading for Lendal then this requirement is no longer needed and there is no need for bias in the light sequence.
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention. I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.[/p][/quote]I believe in being fair - it always was the case that Bootham was used as a traffic reservoir due to its relative length and nature, and it was the lesser evil to have the tail back there than an even worse situation on the feeder routes into Gillygate. It is logical that if there is less traffic heading for Lendal then this requirement is no longer needed and there is no need for bias in the light sequence. Mulgrave
  • Score: 496

6:15pm Sat 15 Feb 14

RoseD says...

eeoodares wrote:
What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original!

Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?
Exactly what I said last Summer. Build a new footbridge for all the fully abled walkers. It could even be called the Merrett-Alexander Bridge so when these clowns leave for 'greener pastures' we would still remember them.....
[quote][p][bold]eeoodares[/bold] wrote: What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original! Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?[/p][/quote]Exactly what I said last Summer. Build a new footbridge for all the fully abled walkers. It could even be called the Merrett-Alexander Bridge so when these clowns leave for 'greener pastures' we would still remember them..... RoseD
  • Score: 617

6:29pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Rowntree Baby says...

Obviously none of the 'transport officials' join the queues at peak times - I smiled at the comment:

"Studies of York’s five inbound and five outbound Park&Ride routes showed travel times had only improved on three journeys, from the centre of York to Rawcliffe Bar"

It doesn't mention the Rawcliffe Bar to the centre of York journey, because the bus sits in the Shipton Road traffic for 15+ minutes, as it can't get through the congestion waiting to get over Clifton Bridge !
Obviously none of the 'transport officials' join the queues at peak times - I smiled at the comment: "Studies of York’s five inbound and five outbound Park&Ride routes showed travel times had only improved on three journeys, from the centre of York to Rawcliffe Bar" It doesn't mention the Rawcliffe Bar to the centre of York journey, because the bus sits in the Shipton Road traffic for 15+ minutes, as it can't get through the congestion waiting to get over Clifton Bridge ! Rowntree Baby
  • Score: 227

6:34pm Sat 15 Feb 14

deckhanddave says...

Eh????????

Bus journey times longer yet buses travelling faster? Time dilation? Worm holes? Rewriting the length of a mile or kilometre?Bending light? Or maybe just good old stretching the truth? Whatever does it take to get these council 'Jackanapes'(I use the term deliberately) to be forthright and honest?
Eh???????? Bus journey times longer yet buses travelling faster? Time dilation? Worm holes? Rewriting the length of a mile or kilometre?Bending light? Or maybe just good old stretching the truth? Whatever does it take to get these council 'Jackanapes'(I use the term deliberately) to be forthright and honest? deckhanddave
  • Score: 657

6:40pm Sat 15 Feb 14

bolero says...

NoNewsIsGoodNews wrote:
But hang on a minute.....

Merrett the ferret said in this very paper that bus times had reduced because of the closure.

Surely our councillors wouldn't be lying to us, would they?
Will you please stop insulting ferrets.
[quote][p][bold]NoNewsIsGoodNews[/bold] wrote: But hang on a minute..... Merrett the ferret said in this very paper that bus times had reduced because of the closure. Surely our councillors wouldn't be lying to us, would they?[/p][/quote]Will you please stop insulting ferrets. bolero
  • Score: 625

7:01pm Sat 15 Feb 14

JasBro says...

yorkboy wrote:
So how about leeman road??? No mention yet the traffic counter is working! Over the last few weeks traffic has got worse, last night the queue from water end went back beyond the railway museum down leeman road! The one way system at the north end of leeman road is now even more traffic choked!! Delaying the many buses on leeman road! Its a complete joke! So the facts are close a bridge for tourists to walk over at the risk of been hit by a fast moving taxi or bus, whereas before traffic was slower and safer, in turn fine the tourists and p*** them off never to return!! Send all traffic onto roads where many people live, leeman road, foss islands, clifton green and shipton road, add delays to buses that use these roads! If they actually dualled the ring road people might use it! For example to go from thirsk to selby its quicker to still come through york! Water end carries around 25,000 cars a day which is shocking and many using it to avoid the A1237! Sort that first before closing bridges
Absolutely spot on.

Believe it or not, they're actually claiming traffic on Leeman Rd has decreased. What a farce!

Truth is that the traffic counter on Leeman Rd was only put in just before the trial started so they have absolutely no meaningful figures to act as a baseline for comparison.

Anybody who knows Leeman Rd, Water End and Clifton Green can see the massive increase in traffic.
[quote][p][bold]yorkboy[/bold] wrote: So how about leeman road??? No mention yet the traffic counter is working! Over the last few weeks traffic has got worse, last night the queue from water end went back beyond the railway museum down leeman road! The one way system at the north end of leeman road is now even more traffic choked!! Delaying the many buses on leeman road! Its a complete joke! So the facts are close a bridge for tourists to walk over at the risk of been hit by a fast moving taxi or bus, whereas before traffic was slower and safer, in turn fine the tourists and p*** them off never to return!! Send all traffic onto roads where many people live, leeman road, foss islands, clifton green and shipton road, add delays to buses that use these roads! If they actually dualled the ring road people might use it! For example to go from thirsk to selby its quicker to still come through york! Water end carries around 25,000 cars a day which is shocking and many using it to avoid the A1237! Sort that first before closing bridges[/p][/quote]Absolutely spot on. Believe it or not, they're actually claiming traffic on Leeman Rd has decreased. What a farce! Truth is that the traffic counter on Leeman Rd was only put in just before the trial started so they have absolutely no meaningful figures to act as a baseline for comparison. Anybody who knows Leeman Rd, Water End and Clifton Green can see the massive increase in traffic. JasBro
  • Score: 956

7:37pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Dave Ruddock says...

well not much point stating the blinding obviouse as the council feel it below them to listen to the public.
sses run to bus timetable, well First York dont do this, so why oh whuy do the shortsighted blithering Idiots de a prober job , short your finances out before even attenpting anything else.

Oh and Press, if Headline is about Park and ride - u show 2 nomal busses and i suspect 2 of them are No1 buses

please check the photo
well not much point stating the blinding obviouse as the council feel it below them to listen to the public. sses run to bus timetable, well First York dont do this, so why oh whuy do the shortsighted blithering Idiots de a prober job , short your finances out before even attenpting anything else. Oh and Press, if Headline is about Park and ride - u show 2 nomal busses and i suspect 2 of them are No1 buses please check the photo Dave Ruddock
  • Score: 1083

7:38pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

LibDem wrote:
The bus companies have pointedly failed to provide any auditable performance data on the effects that the closure are having on their normal "stage carriage" services. These carry 75% of passengers in York and have been as vulnerable as other traffic to increased congestion on the rest of the highway network.

The comments on Park and Rode make little sense. The journey time is the duration elapsing between the bus leaving the timing point and arriving at the Park and Rode site (and via versa). The layover time at the stop is irrelevant.

The Council should agree to lift the trial on 28th February. If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May.
Ride not Rode.
[quote][p][bold]LibDem[/bold] wrote: The bus companies have pointedly failed to provide any auditable performance data on the effects that the closure are having on their normal "stage carriage" services. These carry 75% of passengers in York and have been as vulnerable as other traffic to increased congestion on the rest of the highway network. The comments on Park and Rode make little sense. The journey time is the duration elapsing between the bus leaving the timing point and arriving at the Park and Rode site (and via versa). The layover time at the stop is irrelevant. The Council should agree to lift the trial on 28th February. If they are convinced that it has popular support then they could hold a referendum on its future. To minimise costs this could be done to coincide with the European elections in May.[/p][/quote]Ride not Rode. jake777
  • Score: -2050

7:41pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Have to make a comment wrote:
Statistics can just about prove whatever you like.

FACT - Closure of bridge probably not made that much difference one way, or the other to bus times.

FACT - Other routes busier, not rocket science

FACT - Some visitors to York left with fines potentially putting them off returning.

FACT - Buses and old Taxis still crossing the bridge belching out fumes into our historic city air

No benefit to pedestrians lulled into a false sense of security with a "quieter bridge" then run over by a double decker

Whats improved?
lots of benefits to the city, lots of cars off the bridge.
[quote][p][bold]Have to make a comment[/bold] wrote: Statistics can just about prove whatever you like. FACT - Closure of bridge probably not made that much difference one way, or the other to bus times. FACT - Other routes busier, not rocket science FACT - Some visitors to York left with fines potentially putting them off returning. FACT - Buses and old Taxis still crossing the bridge belching out fumes into our historic city air No benefit to pedestrians lulled into a false sense of security with a "quieter bridge" then run over by a double decker Whats improved?[/p][/quote]lots of benefits to the city, lots of cars off the bridge. jake777
  • Score: -1780

7:46pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Mulgrave wrote:
The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.[/p][/quote]you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha. jake777
  • Score: 100

7:49pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.
But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet!
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.[/p][/quote]you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet! Mulgrave
  • Score: 254

7:57pm Sat 15 Feb 14

JasBro says...

yorkboy wrote:
Also why not like has been said provide a lovely looking footbridge from the bus waiting area at the end of leeman road over the river and link it so people would walk over it from the station go over the river and through museum gardens, a controlled crossing near lendal bridge to let people cross safely from museum gardens to the city centre would make this a lovely almost traffic free entrance to York!! Oh yeah this will never happen as the council took a back handers off the buyer of the old council offices to create a traffic free street outside! About time they admitted it!
A foot/cycle bridge would be such a great idea. It would be a wonderful properly pedestrian, cycle friendly entrance to the city. Direct access from the station and a lovely walk through museum gardens. What could be better? It would really make York stand out.

I'm sure I remember a footbridge was part of the plan for the teardrop site at the back of the station, but for some bizarre reason it seems to have been dropped.

Found it ..... from feb 2012,
http://www.york.gov.
uk/download/download
s/id/2378/draft_york
_northwest_transport
_masterplan

Page 5 "Pedestrian/cycle bridge across the River Ouse in the vicinity of Scarborough Bridge"

Why was it dropped? It seems our political leaders are afraid to make the brave, bold decisions which would be best for our city.
[quote][p][bold]yorkboy[/bold] wrote: Also why not like has been said provide a lovely looking footbridge from the bus waiting area at the end of leeman road over the river and link it so people would walk over it from the station go over the river and through museum gardens, a controlled crossing near lendal bridge to let people cross safely from museum gardens to the city centre would make this a lovely almost traffic free entrance to York!! Oh yeah this will never happen as the council took a back handers off the buyer of the old council offices to create a traffic free street outside! About time they admitted it![/p][/quote]A foot/cycle bridge would be such a great idea. It would be a wonderful properly pedestrian, cycle friendly entrance to the city. Direct access from the station and a lovely walk through museum gardens. What could be better? It would really make York stand out. I'm sure I remember a footbridge was part of the plan for the teardrop site at the back of the station, but for some bizarre reason it seems to have been dropped. Found it ..... from feb 2012, http://www.york.gov. uk/download/download s/id/2378/draft_york _northwest_transport _masterplan Page 5 "Pedestrian/cycle bridge across the River Ouse in the vicinity of Scarborough Bridge" Why was it dropped? It seems our political leaders are afraid to make the brave, bold decisions which would be best for our city. JasBro
  • Score: 246

8:22pm Sat 15 Feb 14

againstthecuts says...

They wont lift the ban. They are making too much money in fines.
They wont lift the ban. They are making too much money in fines. againstthecuts
  • Score: 421

8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Mulgrave wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.
But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet!
:-) better than the one you are on.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.[/p][/quote]you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet![/p][/quote]:-) better than the one you are on. jake777
  • Score: -1830

9:06pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Tea please says...

jake777 wrote:
Have to make a comment wrote:
Statistics can just about prove whatever you like.

FACT - Closure of bridge probably not made that much difference one way, or the other to bus times.

FACT - Other routes busier, not rocket science

FACT - Some visitors to York left with fines potentially putting them off returning.

FACT - Buses and old Taxis still crossing the bridge belching out fumes into our historic city air

No benefit to pedestrians lulled into a false sense of security with a "quieter bridgeI must correct you;
1) Benefits to City, lots of cars off the bridge.?
Benefits only apply to public transport using Lendal. Not quite sure how many residents there are in around Lendal, but there's a **** sight more on routes by which we must now travel eg Clifton & Foss Islands. What of their benefits? Probably a two fold increase in exhaust emissions. Roll on 2015! I cant wait to exercise my right to vote. Note then to Lib-Dems & Tories. Time to clearly state your intentions
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Have to make a comment[/bold] wrote: Statistics can just about prove whatever you like. FACT - Closure of bridge probably not made that much difference one way, or the other to bus times. FACT - Other routes busier, not rocket science FACT - Some visitors to York left with fines potentially putting them off returning. FACT - Buses and old Taxis still crossing the bridge belching out fumes into our historic city air No benefit to pedestrians lulled into a false sense of security with a "quieter bridgeI must correct you; 1) Benefits to City, lots of cars off the bridge.? Benefits only apply to public transport using Lendal. Not quite sure how many residents there are in around Lendal, but there's a **** sight more on routes by which we must now travel eg Clifton & Foss Islands. What of their benefits? Probably a two fold increase in exhaust emissions. Roll on 2015! I cant wait to exercise my right to vote. Note then to Lib-Dems & Tories. Time to clearly state your intentions Tea please
  • Score: 248

11:12pm Sat 15 Feb 14

courier46 says...

So the trial has failed on all counts, like the majority, but not the idiots in charge knew that it would do.
The longer this is left the more foolish you look!!!!!
So the trial has failed on all counts, like the majority, but not the idiots in charge knew that it would do. The longer this is left the more foolish you look!!!!! courier46
  • Score: 537

5:00am Sun 16 Feb 14

Magicman! says...

Studies of York’s five inbound and five outbound Park&Ride routes showed travel times had only improved on three journeys, from the centre of York to Rawcliffe Bar and both ways on the Askham Bar service. A report by transport officials said none of the increases was “significant” and suggested Park&Ride schedules could be the main reason for hold-ups.

The fact that the Askham Bar service has seen improvements in both directions goes to prove that there is now less traffic around the railway station and rougier street area, also aided by the traffic lights from station avenue into rougier street being on green for longer (however, more could be done to improve on this, by programming the pedestrian crossing outside the royal york hotel to block a red light from showing when the lights for traffic going into station avenue are green - as currently this occurs 8/10 times and prevents the smooth flow of traffic).

The fact the Rawcliffe Bar route is only seeing improvements on the outbound journeys shows less traffic is going over the bridge itself and along St Lenoards Place... BUT the big killer for inbound services running to time is Clifton Green; since the council removed the cycle lane in addition to tampering with the traffic lights to fool everybody into thinking that their getting rid of the cycle lane "got rid of congestion created by the LibDems" gave about 20 seconds more time for Water End - BUT the flipside of this is that the A19 Shipton Road inbound now has 20 seconds extra time on a red light, in addition to there no longer being a synchronisation between the clifton green traffic lights and the rawcliffe lane lights... just this last week, inbound traffic has been queuing to well beyond Clifton Park Avenue - and the queues were not as long along that road until the Water End lights had more green time added; and this means the buses are getting caught in this congestion so cannot keep to time.

If the council had heeded my suggestion of aligning Water End and Water Lane opposite each other so they both combined and shared the same 'green light', it would have doubled the amount of time on green for both roads whilst not having any effect on the A19 spent waiting on a red light (if anything it would have been reduced by about 3 seconds)... instead I got quoted the old 'village green' rebuffal, which was clearly just masking a case of "we want to do our own thing", because the council has since built the poppleton park and ride site on village green land. York's traffic management is always on a knife edge, and the council's tampering at Water End has tipped it over the edge for Shipton Road.
[quote]Studies of York’s five inbound and five outbound Park&Ride routes showed travel times had only improved on three journeys, from the centre of York to Rawcliffe Bar and both ways on the Askham Bar service. A report by transport officials said none of the increases was “significant” and suggested Park&Ride schedules could be the main reason for hold-ups. [/quote] The fact that the Askham Bar service has seen improvements in both directions goes to prove that there is now less traffic around the railway station and rougier street area, also aided by the traffic lights from station avenue into rougier street being on green for longer (however, more could be done to improve on this, by programming the pedestrian crossing outside the royal york hotel to block a red light from showing when the lights for traffic going into station avenue are green - as currently this occurs 8/10 times and prevents the smooth flow of traffic). The fact the Rawcliffe Bar route is only seeing improvements on the outbound journeys shows less traffic is going over the bridge itself and along St Lenoards Place... BUT the big killer for inbound services running to time is Clifton Green; since the council removed the cycle lane in addition to tampering with the traffic lights to fool everybody into thinking that their getting rid of the cycle lane "got rid of congestion created by the LibDems" gave about 20 seconds more time for Water End - BUT the flipside of this is that the A19 Shipton Road inbound now has 20 seconds extra time on a red light, in addition to there no longer being a synchronisation between the clifton green traffic lights and the rawcliffe lane lights... just this last week, inbound traffic has been queuing to well beyond Clifton Park Avenue - and the queues were not as long along that road until the Water End lights had more green time added; and this means the buses are getting caught in this congestion so cannot keep to time. If the council had heeded my suggestion of aligning Water End and Water Lane opposite each other so they both combined and shared the same 'green light', it would have doubled the amount of time on green for both roads whilst not having any effect on the A19 spent waiting on a red light (if anything it would have been reduced by about 3 seconds)... instead I got quoted the old 'village green' rebuffal, which was clearly just masking a case of "we want to do our own thing", because the council has since built the poppleton park and ride site on village green land. York's traffic management is always on a knife edge, and the council's tampering at Water End has tipped it over the edge for Shipton Road. Magicman!
  • Score: -3

8:21am Sun 16 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

Just a little fly in the well worn old village green argument - Clifton Green does actually appear to tick every box as......an old village green.
Just a little fly in the well worn old village green argument - Clifton Green does actually appear to tick every box as......an old village green. Mulgrave
  • Score: -33

8:52am Sun 16 Feb 14

SilentMajor I.T. says...

And you,,, you who will comment here. Are you merely men of words, venting your spleens with an ineffectual keystroke for a little textual glory. Or are you men of your words? My word is my bond, nothing more, nothing less. I say ENOUGH, silent no more. But is there one amongst you who will follow his words?
And you,,, you who will comment here. Are you merely men of words, venting your spleens with an ineffectual keystroke for a little textual glory. Or are you men of your words? My word is my bond, nothing more, nothing less. I say ENOUGH, silent no more. But is there one amongst you who will follow his words? SilentMajor I.T.
  • Score: -39

9:24am Sun 16 Feb 14

Scores On The Doors says...

The over night negative scores achievement awards are as follows.

Gold = AnotherPointofView - 403
Silver = strangebuttrue? - 313
Bronze = LibDem - 308

Only one award per person, well done to all who took part.
The over night negative scores achievement awards are as follows. Gold = AnotherPointofView - 403 Silver = strangebuttrue? - 313 Bronze = LibDem - 308 Only one award per person, well done to all who took part. Scores On The Doors
  • Score: -34

9:33am Sun 16 Feb 14

Scores On The Doors says...

Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner.

The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.
Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments. Scores On The Doors
  • Score: -36

9:38am Sun 16 Feb 14

Scores On The Doors says...

Todays award for "I don't know what is means but it sound good so I will post it twice" award.

SilentMajor I.T.

A truly great example of a man of words, venting his spleen with ineffectual keystroke for a little textual glory.
Todays award for "I don't know what is means but it sound good so I will post it twice" award. SilentMajor I.T. A truly great example of a man of words, venting his spleen with ineffectual keystroke for a little textual glory. Scores On The Doors
  • Score: -32

9:43am Sun 16 Feb 14

chelk says...

When the Manipulating Moron adjusts the scores it has become a Badge of Honour now to have a large minus score an people resort to those tactics it makes me more determined to push this lot out at the election.
When the Manipulating Moron adjusts the scores it has become a Badge of Honour now to have a large minus score an people resort to those tactics it makes me more determined to push this lot out at the election. chelk
  • Score: 336

9:44am Sun 16 Feb 14

Yorkie41 says...

eeoodares wrote:
What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original!

Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?
I rely don't see why the press feels the need anymore to have these scores underneath each comment as they are now becoming a farce and it is making a mockery off democracy in my opinion.
[quote][p][bold]eeoodares[/bold] wrote: What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original! Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?[/p][/quote]I rely don't see why the press feels the need anymore to have these scores underneath each comment as they are now becoming a farce and it is making a mockery off democracy in my opinion. Yorkie41
  • Score: 1139

11:07am Sun 16 Feb 14

bolero says...

No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.
No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that. bolero
  • Score: -11

11:37am Sun 16 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

From yesterdays comments (total 46) 6 are favouring/supporting
, however vaguely. The remaining 40 are non-supporting.

Comments:
13.33% comments supporting.

86.66% comments are non-supporting.

This reflects well with the recent poll where 82% voted to end the restriction.

Scores:

Total scores recorded = 6498 (all +ve & -ve).

+ve scores 1061 (16.32%)

-ve scores 5437 (83.67%)

Frig factor for the recorded scores = +/-173.32% when compared against the registered users who posted opinion. Yes there will have been registered user scores cast without posting a comment but as we saw with the recent poll when they were taken into account the opinion was massively reversed.

If the press published the number of unique visitor to each article there would be no where near enough to equal the scores total. There are only 27 unique posters who could cast a maximum 1,242 thumbs up or down to the comments and 4 of the supporting comments were from 1 individual and 3 unique supporters (11.11%).

Based on this analysis it would be interesting to see the outcome of a referendum but it seems high 80's% disagree with the recommendations in the press report. More people made their opinions known here on the press website than turned up to the Westfield community conversation (over X2).
From yesterdays comments (total 46) 6 are favouring/supporting , however vaguely. The remaining 40 are non-supporting. Comments: 13.33% comments supporting. 86.66% comments are non-supporting. This reflects well with the recent poll where 82% voted to end the restriction. Scores: Total scores recorded = 6498 (all +ve & -ve). +ve scores 1061 (16.32%) -ve scores 5437 (83.67%) Frig factor for the recorded scores = +/-173.32% when compared against the registered users who posted opinion. Yes there will have been registered user scores cast without posting a comment but as we saw with the recent poll when they were taken into account the opinion was massively reversed. If the press published the number of unique visitor to each article there would be no where near enough to equal the scores total. There are only 27 unique posters who could cast a maximum 1,242 thumbs up or down to the comments and 4 of the supporting comments were from 1 individual and 3 unique supporters (11.11%). Based on this analysis it would be interesting to see the outcome of a referendum but it seems high 80's% disagree with the recommendations in the press report. More people made their opinions known here on the press website than turned up to the Westfield community conversation (over X2). YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -3

12:02pm Sun 16 Feb 14

sniper 9964 says...

The press gets ot wrong AGAIN there is only 5 P & R sites just proves the press prints crap
The press gets ot wrong AGAIN there is only 5 P & R sites just proves the press prints crap sniper 9964
  • Score: 2

12:34pm Sun 16 Feb 14

Owain ap Llwyd says...

eeoodares wrote:
What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original!

Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?
I see that the council moron has been at it again, fudging the figures.
When will York Press get a grip on this idiot?
As for the council and the "trail"......HA! HA! HA!
If York council were a decent council, they would resign en mass NOW!
Then we could have a fair vote on the Lendal Bridge matter.
[quote][p][bold]eeoodares[/bold] wrote: What you going to do now Councillor? ...... 'nothing, keep the ban and fudge some figures', what about you Blinkered Cycling Fascist? 'close more roads'.... How original! Why not build a footbridge to improve the pedestrian experience, sort out the timing of the traffic lights to improve traffic flow for both busses and cars?[/p][/quote]I see that the council moron has been at it again, fudging the figures. When will York Press get a grip on this idiot? As for the council and the "trail"......HA! HA! HA! If York council were a decent council, they would resign en mass NOW! Then we could have a fair vote on the Lendal Bridge matter. Owain ap Llwyd
  • Score: 10

1:26pm Sun 16 Feb 14

Mulgrave says...

bolero wrote:
No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.
hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.[/p][/quote]hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier. Mulgrave
  • Score: 6

4:39pm Sun 16 Feb 14

nowthen says...

Mulgrave wrote:
bolero wrote:
No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.
hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.
I think Hoofarted's had her knuckles rapped ; ' always was a bad apple.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.[/p][/quote]hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.[/p][/quote]I think Hoofarted's had her knuckles rapped ; ' always was a bad apple. nowthen
  • Score: 8

5:59pm Sun 16 Feb 14

yawn.. says...

Credit where credit's due.. the City of York Council have really persevered with this Jedi mind thing... '..these aren't the droids your looking for.. move along..'
Credit where credit's due.. the City of York Council have really persevered with this Jedi mind thing... '..these aren't the droids your looking for.. move along..' yawn..
  • Score: 1

6:29pm Sun 16 Feb 14

inthesticks says...

jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.
But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet!
:-) better than the one you are on.
Ladies and Gents, I present the vote-rigger...
Let the facts speak for themselves, and the votes..
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.[/p][/quote]you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet![/p][/quote]:-) better than the one you are on.[/p][/quote]Ladies and Gents, I present the vote-rigger... Let the facts speak for themselves, and the votes.. inthesticks
  • Score: 5328

6:33pm Sun 16 Feb 14

inthesticks says...

8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

:-) better than the one you are on.

Score: 111



I rest my case.
8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14 jake777 says... :-) better than the one you are on. Score: 111 I rest my case. inthesticks
  • Score: 2

6:43pm Sun 16 Feb 14

inthesticks says...

nowthen wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
bolero wrote:
No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.
hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.
I think Hoofarted's had her knuckles rapped ; ' always was a bad apple.
Exactly. The whip has rapped her knuckles.
[quote][p][bold]nowthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.[/p][/quote]hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.[/p][/quote]I think Hoofarted's had her knuckles rapped ; ' always was a bad apple.[/p][/quote]Exactly. The whip has rapped her knuckles. inthesticks
  • Score: 6

8:40pm Sun 16 Feb 14

SilentMajor I.T. says...

Not one?
Not one? SilentMajor I.T.
  • Score: -5

9:34pm Sun 16 Feb 14

inthesticks says...

inthesticks wrote:
8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

:-) better than the one you are on.

Score: 111



I rest my case.
Then jakey boy pops back in a panic to try and cover his tracks. Too late child, we got your number.
*
"Ladies and Gents, I present the vote-rigger...
Let the facts speak for themselves, and the votes..

Score: 5325"

Wow. Don`t think over 5000 people would really think I deserve that many votes jakey, even the Libdems would be hard pressed to get that.
[quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: 8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14 jake777 says... :-) better than the one you are on. Score: 111 I rest my case.[/p][/quote]Then jakey boy pops back in a panic to try and cover his tracks. Too late child, we got your number. * "Ladies and Gents, I present the vote-rigger... Let the facts speak for themselves, and the votes.. Score: 5325" Wow. Don`t think over 5000 people would really think I deserve that many votes jakey, even the Libdems would be hard pressed to get that. inthesticks
  • Score: 1

10:29pm Sun 16 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

Mulgrave wrote:
strangebuttrue? wrote:
Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention.

I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.
I believe in being fair - it always was the case that Bootham was used as a traffic reservoir due to its relative length and nature, and it was the lesser evil to have the tail back there than an even worse situation on the feeder routes into Gillygate. It is logical that if there is less traffic heading for Lendal then this requirement is no longer needed and there is no need for bias in the light sequence.
To be fair you are correct but it does not detract from the fact that the council have not mentioned the changes to the lights. Taking on board what you are saying about traffic heading to Lendal which mostly it now does not, I would also suggest that there may be more traffic on this road now, although it may seem there is less due to the fact it is not held there. I used to avoid it but now use it regularly as it is so much easier to get through.

Had my first walk over Lendal Bridge today since the restrictions put in place. Noticed not one jot of difference to how it used to be. Still dodging all the people on the path still daren't step out onto road for fear of being run down. Despite 2 community officers at one end council made at least £600 at £30 a time in the time it took me to cross the bridge twice. If it had not been for the community officers it could have been at least doubled that.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention. I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.[/p][/quote]I believe in being fair - it always was the case that Bootham was used as a traffic reservoir due to its relative length and nature, and it was the lesser evil to have the tail back there than an even worse situation on the feeder routes into Gillygate. It is logical that if there is less traffic heading for Lendal then this requirement is no longer needed and there is no need for bias in the light sequence.[/p][/quote]To be fair you are correct but it does not detract from the fact that the council have not mentioned the changes to the lights. Taking on board what you are saying about traffic heading to Lendal which mostly it now does not, I would also suggest that there may be more traffic on this road now, although it may seem there is less due to the fact it is not held there. I used to avoid it but now use it regularly as it is so much easier to get through. Had my first walk over Lendal Bridge today since the restrictions put in place. Noticed not one jot of difference to how it used to be. Still dodging all the people on the path still daren't step out onto road for fear of being run down. Despite 2 community officers at one end council made at least £600 at £30 a time in the time it took me to cross the bridge twice. If it had not been for the community officers it could have been at least doubled that. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -56

11:42pm Sun 16 Feb 14

jake777 says...

strangebuttrue? wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
strangebuttrue? wrote:
Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention.

I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.
I believe in being fair - it always was the case that Bootham was used as a traffic reservoir due to its relative length and nature, and it was the lesser evil to have the tail back there than an even worse situation on the feeder routes into Gillygate. It is logical that if there is less traffic heading for Lendal then this requirement is no longer needed and there is no need for bias in the light sequence.
To be fair you are correct but it does not detract from the fact that the council have not mentioned the changes to the lights. Taking on board what you are saying about traffic heading to Lendal which mostly it now does not, I would also suggest that there may be more traffic on this road now, although it may seem there is less due to the fact it is not held there. I used to avoid it but now use it regularly as it is so much easier to get through.

Had my first walk over Lendal Bridge today since the restrictions put in place. Noticed not one jot of difference to how it used to be. Still dodging all the people on the path still daren't step out onto road for fear of being run down. Despite 2 community officers at one end council made at least £600 at £30 a time in the time it took me to cross the bridge twice. If it had not been for the community officers it could have been at least doubled that.
yawn yawn yawn.
[quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]strangebuttrue?[/bold] wrote: Let's also not forget that the council have massively altered the light sequencing at the end of Bootham which has helped reduce the journey time for the Rawcliffe Bar service. A little something they don't mention. I know they have changed this sequence because I now use this route as it is so easy to get through. Since they made the change you are unlucky if you have to wait for more than one green to get off Bootham from the same position in the queue that it used to take four greens.[/p][/quote]I believe in being fair - it always was the case that Bootham was used as a traffic reservoir due to its relative length and nature, and it was the lesser evil to have the tail back there than an even worse situation on the feeder routes into Gillygate. It is logical that if there is less traffic heading for Lendal then this requirement is no longer needed and there is no need for bias in the light sequence.[/p][/quote]To be fair you are correct but it does not detract from the fact that the council have not mentioned the changes to the lights. Taking on board what you are saying about traffic heading to Lendal which mostly it now does not, I would also suggest that there may be more traffic on this road now, although it may seem there is less due to the fact it is not held there. I used to avoid it but now use it regularly as it is so much easier to get through. Had my first walk over Lendal Bridge today since the restrictions put in place. Noticed not one jot of difference to how it used to be. Still dodging all the people on the path still daren't step out onto road for fear of being run down. Despite 2 community officers at one end council made at least £600 at £30 a time in the time it took me to cross the bridge twice. If it had not been for the community officers it could have been at least doubled that.[/p][/quote]yawn yawn yawn. jake777
  • Score: -2683

11:43pm Sun 16 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Mulgrave wrote:
bolero wrote:
No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.
hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.
yawn yawn yawn.
[quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: No comments from johnthan on this one but the vote manipulation continues. Funny that.[/p][/quote]hoofarted hasn't commented in a long while. Even funnier.[/p][/quote]yawn yawn yawn. jake777
  • Score: -1547

11:46pm Sun 16 Feb 14

jake777 says...

inthesticks wrote:
inthesticks wrote:
8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14

jake777 says...

:-) better than the one you are on.

Score: 111



I rest my case.
Then jakey boy pops back in a panic to try and cover his tracks. Too late child, we got your number.
*
"Ladies and Gents, I present the vote-rigger...
Let the facts speak for themselves, and the votes..

Score: 5325"

Wow. Don`t think over 5000 people would really think I deserve that many votes jakey, even the Libdems would be hard pressed to get that.
you ain't got any of numbers child.
[quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]inthesticks[/bold] wrote: 8:24pm Sat 15 Feb 14 jake777 says... :-) better than the one you are on. Score: 111 I rest my case.[/p][/quote]Then jakey boy pops back in a panic to try and cover his tracks. Too late child, we got your number. * "Ladies and Gents, I present the vote-rigger... Let the facts speak for themselves, and the votes.. Score: 5325" Wow. Don`t think over 5000 people would really think I deserve that many votes jakey, even the Libdems would be hard pressed to get that.[/p][/quote]you ain't got any of numbers child. jake777
  • Score: -1979

11:49pm Sun 16 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Scores On The Doors wrote:
Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner.

The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.
you got it ha ha.
[quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.[/p][/quote]you got it ha ha. jake777
  • Score: -1415

7:16am Mon 17 Feb 14

mortandindi says...

What a surprise the trail is going to continue beyond the end of February. These muppetts at the council that invented this stupid idea want to save face. Why not just come out and say the bridge is staying closed because that is what is going to happen.
The trail has been nothing more than a money making exercise as all travel times for motor transport has increased or at best no advantage has been made.
Its time the whole idea was dropped and the idiots that devised this scheme are named and shamed. This council is a disgrace and the sooner we get rid of the lot of them the better. The Council is having to make cuts and loose jobs, well lets start with this load of morons.
What a surprise the trail is going to continue beyond the end of February. These muppetts at the council that invented this stupid idea want to save face. Why not just come out and say the bridge is staying closed because that is what is going to happen. The trail has been nothing more than a money making exercise as all travel times for motor transport has increased or at best no advantage has been made. Its time the whole idea was dropped and the idiots that devised this scheme are named and shamed. This council is a disgrace and the sooner we get rid of the lot of them the better. The Council is having to make cuts and loose jobs, well lets start with this load of morons. mortandindi
  • Score: -9

9:09am Mon 17 Feb 14

pedalling paul says...

Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.
Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise. pedalling paul
  • Score: 10

10:05am Mon 17 Feb 14

again says...

Why does the Press bother to allow comments beneath these bridge stories?

It was obvious they would be infested by by trolls!
Why does the Press bother to allow comments beneath these bridge stories? It was obvious they would be infested by by trolls! again
  • Score: -17

10:26am Mon 17 Feb 14

Scores On The Doors says...

jake777 wrote:
Scores On The Doors wrote:
Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner.

The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.
you got it ha ha.
But you didn't ha ha.
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.[/p][/quote]you got it ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you didn't ha ha. Scores On The Doors
  • Score: -21

11:07am Mon 17 Feb 14

bolero says...

Come on Merrett admit it, this is a total and utter failure on all counts. All you've succeeded in doing is severing a vital link between two halves of a city and in so doing caused chaos in on other routes and added journey times to the much flaunted Park and Ride services. You will never be forgiven for this hare-brained scheme and the final vote will no doubt be manifested in May 2015.
Come on Merrett admit it, this is a total and utter failure on all counts. All you've succeeded in doing is severing a vital link between two halves of a city and in so doing caused chaos in on other routes and added journey times to the much flaunted Park and Ride services. You will never be forgiven for this hare-brained scheme and the final vote will no doubt be manifested in May 2015. bolero
  • Score: -9

11:36am Mon 17 Feb 14

pjr_1984 says...

""JOURNEY times on seven of York’s ten Park&Ride routes have increased as the Lendal Bridge traffic trial continues – but traffic chiefs have claimed buses may actually be travelling faster than before the restrictions began.""
....and also....
"..– have also shown that, of nine major roads around the city, seven were busier in January than in the same month a year before.""
.........
... well however much spin you want to put on it and figures you want to massage.. the simple facts are . * This has made congestion within the CITY (not just one bridge) worse - no doubt increasing pollution.. * i appreciate the need for the city to be inviting to tourists and some method for them to be able to walk from the station to the city centre is needed away from a main inner ring road route would be great.. But closing this one bridge is NOT the answer. the negatives are outweighing the positives .. all this is , is a political point scoring exercise and cash cow.. the money wasted on all the stupid "projects" no doubt could of been spent on some sort of genuine pedestrian bridge / pathway( from the back of the station across to the museum gardens or other idea!) or something Bold and sensible/workable that both the Tourists AND THE RESIDENTS of this city would agree with!
""JOURNEY times on seven of York’s ten Park&Ride routes have increased as the Lendal Bridge traffic trial continues – but traffic chiefs have claimed buses may actually be travelling faster than before the restrictions began."" ....and also.... "..– have also shown that, of nine major roads around the city, seven were busier in January than in the same month a year before."" ......... ... well however much spin you want to put on it and figures you want to massage.. the simple facts are . * This has made congestion within the CITY (not just one bridge) worse - no doubt increasing pollution.. * i appreciate the need for the city to be inviting to tourists and some method for them to be able to walk from the station to the city centre is needed away from a main inner ring road route would be great.. But closing this one bridge is NOT the answer. the negatives are outweighing the positives .. all this is , is a political point scoring exercise and cash cow.. the money wasted on all the stupid "projects" no doubt could of been spent on some sort of genuine pedestrian bridge / pathway( from the back of the station across to the museum gardens or other idea!) or something Bold and sensible/workable that both the Tourists AND THE RESIDENTS of this city would agree with! pjr_1984
  • Score: -12

2:00pm Mon 17 Feb 14

yorkonafork says...

How long is the report going to take out of interest? I read today that it will take 6 months to decide, surely that can't be right!?

If it I'll probably just start driving over it again and appeal the fines. If everyone ignores it what's going to happen? Not like they have to staff to pay for any appeals at the moment as it is.
How long is the report going to take out of interest? I read today that it will take 6 months to decide, surely that can't be right!? If it I'll probably just start driving over it again and appeal the fines. If everyone ignores it what's going to happen? Not like they have to staff to pay for any appeals at the moment as it is. yorkonafork
  • Score: 1

6:46pm Mon 17 Feb 14

Tricky Dickie says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.
Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress.

Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time.

The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.[/p][/quote]Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress. Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time. The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city. Tricky Dickie
  • Score: 4

7:39pm Mon 17 Feb 14

bolero says...

My vote was 8for a half hour ago but school's out now of course. That's the West Office academy for imbeciles I mean.
My vote was 8for a half hour ago but school's out now of course. That's the West Office academy for imbeciles I mean. bolero
  • Score: 7

10:29pm Mon 17 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Scores On The Doors wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Scores On The Doors wrote:
Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner.

The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.
you got it ha ha.
But you didn't ha ha.
another lovely day on Lendal bridge.
[quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.[/p][/quote]you got it ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you didn't ha ha.[/p][/quote]another lovely day on Lendal bridge. jake777
  • Score: 72

3:22am Tue 18 Feb 14

Magicman! says...

Tricky Dickie wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.
Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress.

Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time.

The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.
The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability.

As it stands currently, there are far too many people who *could* use alternative means of travel, but don't and then sit there in traffic queues complaining that it's the fault of the cyclists, or the buses always stopping, or the council for putting a bus stop by a traffic island or opposite another bus stop... or whatever other crap they spout out, not casting the mirror at themselves so as to think "hang on, I'm on my own in this car, taking up 4 square meters of road space for just 1 person... if I was on a bike I'd only be taking up just less than 2 square meters, and because of the traffic queues I'd actually be a bit quicker than I am here in my Audi"....

People who have phycisal mobility disabilities and those who have to use a motor vehicle to carry heavy items as part of their job are the highest priority of all journeys made by motor vehicles, as the alternatives are not viable... for those of highest priority, I would suggest the council bring in an annual permit to cross the bridge - perhaps at a cost of £30 a year for 2 trips per day over the bridge - so that those who do have to use a vehicle and whereby the bridge is really the only way across as the diversion is not viable can cross the bridge to get to work or to the hospital.
[quote][p][bold]Tricky Dickie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.[/p][/quote]Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress. Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time. The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.[/p][/quote]The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability. As it stands currently, there are far too many people who *could* use alternative means of travel, but don't and then sit there in traffic queues complaining that it's the fault of the cyclists, or the buses always stopping, or the council for putting a bus stop by a traffic island or opposite another bus stop... or whatever other crap they spout out, not casting the mirror at themselves so as to think "hang on, I'm on my own in this car, taking up 4 square meters of road space for just 1 person... if I was on a bike I'd only be taking up just less than 2 square meters, and because of the traffic queues I'd actually be a bit quicker than I am here in my Audi".... People who have phycisal mobility disabilities and those who have to use a motor vehicle to carry heavy items as part of their job are the highest priority of all journeys made by motor vehicles, as the alternatives are not viable... for those of highest priority, I would suggest the council bring in an annual permit to cross the bridge - perhaps at a cost of £30 a year for 2 trips per day over the bridge - so that those who do have to use a vehicle and whereby the bridge is really the only way across as the diversion is not viable can cross the bridge to get to work or to the hospital. Magicman!
  • Score: -4

8:52am Tue 18 Feb 14

Tricky Dickie says...

Magicman! wrote:
Tricky Dickie wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.
Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress.

Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time.

The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.
The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability.

As it stands currently, there are far too many people who *could* use alternative means of travel, but don't and then sit there in traffic queues complaining that it's the fault of the cyclists, or the buses always stopping, or the council for putting a bus stop by a traffic island or opposite another bus stop... or whatever other crap they spout out, not casting the mirror at themselves so as to think "hang on, I'm on my own in this car, taking up 4 square meters of road space for just 1 person... if I was on a bike I'd only be taking up just less than 2 square meters, and because of the traffic queues I'd actually be a bit quicker than I am here in my Audi"....

People who have phycisal mobility disabilities and those who have to use a motor vehicle to carry heavy items as part of their job are the highest priority of all journeys made by motor vehicles, as the alternatives are not viable... for those of highest priority, I would suggest the council bring in an annual permit to cross the bridge - perhaps at a cost of £30 a year for 2 trips per day over the bridge - so that those who do have to use a vehicle and whereby the bridge is really the only way across as the diversion is not viable can cross the bridge to get to work or to the hospital.
Magicman! Can I respectfully suggest you live your life, and let others live theirs. Maybe you should turn that mirror back on yourself for a minute.

It's disingenuous to apply your circumstances, and decision making onto the lives of others, and instruct them to do what you want them to do, rather than what they want or need to do. You have no idea what the life of person that drove from Monk Bar to the NRM is like, and so shouldn't be making comment on whether his journey was "pointless" or not. There are too many people trying to impose their ideals on to others. In one of the recent threads Peddling Paul appeared to be cyber-stalking one of the correspondents, looking at where they lived and then berating them for not using a bus.

It'd be lovely if Exhibition Sq could be entirely traffic free. But it can't, as the bus routes, National Express and Royal Mail would have no viable routes, just like the rest of us have to suffer right now. Closing Lendal Bridge hasn't made York better, it's just made a short piece of road less busy, while making some of the rest of them significantly worse.

Lendal Bridge needs to reopen after the trial, while a viable alternative is dreamt up.
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tricky Dickie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.[/p][/quote]Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress. Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time. The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.[/p][/quote]The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability. As it stands currently, there are far too many people who *could* use alternative means of travel, but don't and then sit there in traffic queues complaining that it's the fault of the cyclists, or the buses always stopping, or the council for putting a bus stop by a traffic island or opposite another bus stop... or whatever other crap they spout out, not casting the mirror at themselves so as to think "hang on, I'm on my own in this car, taking up 4 square meters of road space for just 1 person... if I was on a bike I'd only be taking up just less than 2 square meters, and because of the traffic queues I'd actually be a bit quicker than I am here in my Audi".... People who have phycisal mobility disabilities and those who have to use a motor vehicle to carry heavy items as part of their job are the highest priority of all journeys made by motor vehicles, as the alternatives are not viable... for those of highest priority, I would suggest the council bring in an annual permit to cross the bridge - perhaps at a cost of £30 a year for 2 trips per day over the bridge - so that those who do have to use a vehicle and whereby the bridge is really the only way across as the diversion is not viable can cross the bridge to get to work or to the hospital.[/p][/quote]Magicman! Can I respectfully suggest you live your life, and let others live theirs. Maybe you should turn that mirror back on yourself for a minute. It's disingenuous to apply your circumstances, and decision making onto the lives of others, and instruct them to do what you want them to do, rather than what they want or need to do. You have no idea what the life of person that drove from Monk Bar to the NRM is like, and so shouldn't be making comment on whether his journey was "pointless" or not. There are too many people trying to impose their ideals on to others. In one of the recent threads Peddling Paul appeared to be cyber-stalking one of the correspondents, looking at where they lived and then berating them for not using a bus. It'd be lovely if Exhibition Sq could be entirely traffic free. But it can't, as the bus routes, National Express and Royal Mail would have no viable routes, just like the rest of us have to suffer right now. Closing Lendal Bridge hasn't made York better, it's just made a short piece of road less busy, while making some of the rest of them significantly worse. Lendal Bridge needs to reopen after the trial, while a viable alternative is dreamt up. Tricky Dickie
  • Score: 7

11:39am Tue 18 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

It's pointless arguing with these foaming at the mouth zealots.
They can't wrap their obsessed brains around the fact that people need to get from A to B and often in a way that can't be done reasonably on a bike/bus/their feet.

How hard is it to understand that no one (reasonably speaking) wants a car drivers paradise. Most are quite happy to have cyclists around, more power to them if their journey permits it (when they aren't pulling off mad death defying moves that they'd bang on cars for if the cars tried), it's healthier and reduces traffic so that's great!

But hey that would mess with their rhetoric so it's going to be ignored...
It's pointless arguing with these foaming at the mouth zealots. They can't wrap their obsessed brains around the fact that people need to get from A to B and often in a way that can't be done reasonably on a bike/bus/their feet. How hard is it to understand that no one (reasonably speaking) wants a car drivers paradise. Most are quite happy to have cyclists around, more power to them if their journey permits it (when they aren't pulling off mad death defying moves that they'd bang on cars for if the cars tried), it's healthier and reduces traffic so that's great! But hey that would mess with their rhetoric so it's going to be ignored... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 4

1:00pm Tue 18 Feb 14

bolero says...

No,Tricky Dick, we don't want any more dreamed up ideas. We've had enough of them and they have turned out to be nightmares. Let's get back to reality.
No,Tricky Dick, we don't want any more dreamed up ideas. We've had enough of them and they have turned out to be nightmares. Let's get back to reality. bolero
  • Score: 2

7:22am Wed 19 Feb 14

Igiveinthen says...

Magicman! wrote:
Tricky Dickie wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.
Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress.

Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time.

The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.
The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability.

As it stands currently, there are far too many people who *could* use alternative means of travel, but don't and then sit there in traffic queues complaining that it's the fault of the cyclists, or the buses always stopping, or the council for putting a bus stop by a traffic island or opposite another bus stop... or whatever other crap they spout out, not casting the mirror at themselves so as to think "hang on, I'm on my own in this car, taking up 4 square meters of road space for just 1 person... if I was on a bike I'd only be taking up just less than 2 square meters, and because of the traffic queues I'd actually be a bit quicker than I am here in my Audi"....

People who have phycisal mobility disabilities and those who have to use a motor vehicle to carry heavy items as part of their job are the highest priority of all journeys made by motor vehicles, as the alternatives are not viable... for those of highest priority, I would suggest the council bring in an annual permit to cross the bridge - perhaps at a cost of £30 a year for 2 trips per day over the bridge - so that those who do have to use a vehicle and whereby the bridge is really the only way across as the diversion is not viable can cross the bridge to get to work or to the hospital.
Reading throughvall the comments, and BTW i dont want to profer an oppinion on the matter, but part of your comment included the following -
'The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability.' - from memory I think the chap commented on this very accusation to the fact that he was going home and stopped at the NRM on the way, so it wasn't really a pointless journey was it?
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tricky Dickie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: Doesn't matter which bunch gets elected next time...none of them can create a car user's paradise.[/p][/quote]Paul, nobody expects that a city of York's history and layout will ever be a motorist's paradise. That does not mean, however, that it should be artificially made in to a motorist's nightmare for those that have to, or choose to drive across the city (personal choice is a real pain isn't it? If only people would do what others dictate them to, the world would be far better place - for the dictators). Anyway I digress. Closing Lendal Bridge has made the lives of those of us that work in the city, but need to travel around the city by car hell (no choice in that as I'm carrying tools and passengers). There is no real viable alternative to get from Gillygate to Rougier Street without taking a vastly disproportionate diversion in terms of distance and time. The whole thing needs to be rethought if York isn't going to become a no go zone for anybody trying to do business in the city.[/p][/quote]The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability. As it stands currently, there are far too many people who *could* use alternative means of travel, but don't and then sit there in traffic queues complaining that it's the fault of the cyclists, or the buses always stopping, or the council for putting a bus stop by a traffic island or opposite another bus stop... or whatever other crap they spout out, not casting the mirror at themselves so as to think "hang on, I'm on my own in this car, taking up 4 square meters of road space for just 1 person... if I was on a bike I'd only be taking up just less than 2 square meters, and because of the traffic queues I'd actually be a bit quicker than I am here in my Audi".... People who have phycisal mobility disabilities and those who have to use a motor vehicle to carry heavy items as part of their job are the highest priority of all journeys made by motor vehicles, as the alternatives are not viable... for those of highest priority, I would suggest the council bring in an annual permit to cross the bridge - perhaps at a cost of £30 a year for 2 trips per day over the bridge - so that those who do have to use a vehicle and whereby the bridge is really the only way across as the diversion is not viable can cross the bridge to get to work or to the hospital.[/p][/quote]Reading throughvall the comments, and BTW i dont want to profer an oppinion on the matter, but part of your comment included the following - 'The key point of the closure seems to be getting rid of pointless motor vehicle journeys... one springs to mind of a letter writer who complained because he got a fine after driving from the Monk Bar Hotel to the National Railway Museum - a perfect example of a pointless motor vehicle journey, bearing in mind no mention was made of a disability.' - from memory I think the chap commented on this very accusation to the fact that he was going home and stopped at the NRM on the way, so it wasn't really a pointless journey was it? Igiveinthen
  • Score: 2

7:24am Wed 19 Feb 14

Igiveinthen says...

throughvall = through all
throughvall = through all Igiveinthen
  • Score: 1

11:59am Wed 19 Feb 14

anistasia says...

Never made sense closing the bridge Clifton bridge was opened 50 years ago to ease congestion in the city so why50 years later when we have more cars on the road more congestion the council closes a bridge.it's now proved the council were wrong saying bus times have got quicker
yes possibly only over the bridge not on the roads.closing the bridge is not protecting anything like the deangate closure and the Minster.it's a main route to York station what we need to know now when and if the closure will never lifted or not.keep the bridge closed lose your councilscouncil seats
Never made sense closing the bridge Clifton bridge was opened 50 years ago to ease congestion in the city so why50 years later when we have more cars on the road more congestion the council closes a bridge.it's now proved the council were wrong saying bus times have got quicker yes possibly only over the bridge not on the roads.closing the bridge is not protecting anything like the deangate closure and the Minster.it's a main route to York station what we need to know now when and if the closure will never lifted or not.keep the bridge closed lose your councilscouncil seats anistasia
  • Score: 4

3:29pm Wed 19 Feb 14

HoofHearteds says...

Lendals been a resounding success! The bridge will remain restricted to any traffic and wagons that feel like congesting it throughout the day. Plan B will make Ouse Bridge the same and this amazing historical City will remain preserved for future generations to enjoy.

Positive replies only please :)
Lendals been a resounding success! The bridge will remain restricted to any traffic and wagons that feel like congesting it throughout the day. Plan B will make Ouse Bridge the same and this amazing historical City will remain preserved for future generations to enjoy. Positive replies only please :) HoofHearteds
  • Score: -2

4:33pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Igiveinthen says...

HoofHearteds wrote:
Lendals been a resounding success! The bridge will remain restricted to any traffic and wagons that feel like congesting it throughout the day. Plan B will make Ouse Bridge the same and this amazing historical City will remain preserved for future generations to enjoy. Positive replies only please :)
Preserved in aspic by any chance?
[quote][p][bold]HoofHearteds[/bold] wrote: Lendals been a resounding success! The bridge will remain restricted to any traffic and wagons that feel like congesting it throughout the day. Plan B will make Ouse Bridge the same and this amazing historical City will remain preserved for future generations to enjoy. Positive replies only please :)[/p][/quote]Preserved in aspic by any chance? Igiveinthen
  • Score: 3

4:40pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Igiveinthen says...

jake777 wrote:
Scores On The Doors wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Scores On The Doors wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.
you got it ha ha.
But you didn't ha ha.
another lovely day on Lendal bridge.
Why do they keep letting you out of your room?, why can't your carer lock the computer away and lose the key!
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.[/p][/quote]you got it ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you didn't ha ha.[/p][/quote]another lovely day on Lendal bridge.[/p][/quote]Why do they keep letting you out of your room?, why can't your carer lock the computer away and lose the key! Igiveinthen
  • Score: 0

7:59am Thu 20 Feb 14

smokin750 says...

jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.
But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet!
:-) better than the one you are on.
" better than the one you are on"
Taking into account the previous posts then you are suggesting that you are on a planet better than Earth?
Silly boy.
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.[/p][/quote]you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet![/p][/quote]:-) better than the one you are on.[/p][/quote]" better than the one you are on" Taking into account the previous posts then you are suggesting that you are on a planet better than Earth? Silly boy. smokin750
  • Score: 0

10:56am Fri 21 Feb 14

HoofHearteds says...

The congestion issues biggest problem is, the bus's using the memorial gardens section doing change overs of drivers. Sometimes these bus's are sat congesting the lanes for 20 mins at a time. Why can't the bus company use a different less congested area to stop their vehicles and clog up the network?
The congestion issues biggest problem is, the bus's using the memorial gardens section doing change overs of drivers. Sometimes these bus's are sat congesting the lanes for 20 mins at a time. Why can't the bus company use a different less congested area to stop their vehicles and clog up the network? HoofHearteds
  • Score: 0

2:15pm Fri 21 Feb 14

Batman Begins says...

How about this for a conspiracy theory?
York St John University has a lot of land at its Haxby Road Sports facility.
It has previously tried to purchase the Union Terrace car park.
What if a land swap occurred allowing YCC to create a Park and Ride on Haxby Rd, YSJ can fulfil its Union terrace ambitions, YCC can close Gillygate to traffic!
That’ll speed up journey times for busses!
Food for thought!
How about this for a conspiracy theory? York St John University has a lot of land at its Haxby Road Sports facility. It has previously tried to purchase the Union Terrace car park. What if a land swap occurred allowing YCC to create a Park and Ride on Haxby Rd, YSJ can fulfil its Union terrace ambitions, YCC can close Gillygate to traffic! That’ll speed up journey times for busses! Food for thought! Batman Begins
  • Score: 3

12:56am Sat 22 Feb 14

jake777 says...

smokin750 wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Mulgrave wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.
you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.
But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet!
:-) better than the one you are on.
" better than the one you are on"
Taking into account the previous posts then you are suggesting that you are on a planet better than Earth?
Silly boy.
please don't call yourself a silly boy. That's not nice .
[quote][p][bold]smokin750[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mulgrave[/bold] wrote: The photo shows what many have said, it is obviously not a cycling and pedestrian paradise - if the buses are full the guy on the bike is holding up 200 people! Just a few medium/large ten year old diesel saloons being used as taxis, a Royal Mail lorry, a CoYC Transit pick up, all being held up by the road train on the other side and I would have it framed.[/p][/quote]you must have a good imagination, no royal mail lorry, no Council van, and no road train, you must be on another bridge ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you can see the taxis then? you're on another planet![/p][/quote]:-) better than the one you are on.[/p][/quote]" better than the one you are on" Taking into account the previous posts then you are suggesting that you are on a planet better than Earth? Silly boy.[/p][/quote]please don't call yourself a silly boy. That's not nice . jake777
  • Score: 0

12:58am Sat 22 Feb 14

jake777 says...

Igiveinthen wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Scores On The Doors wrote:
jake777 wrote:
Scores On The Doors wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.
you got it ha ha.
But you didn't ha ha.
another lovely day on Lendal bridge.
Why do they keep letting you out of your room?, why can't your carer lock the computer away and lose the key!
simple I have more brains than you, so they wont lock me up.
[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scores On The Doors[/bold] wrote: Todays "Be As Smart As You Can BE" award winner. The winner is, jake777, an outstanding effort in one line comments.[/p][/quote]you got it ha ha.[/p][/quote]But you didn't ha ha.[/p][/quote]another lovely day on Lendal bridge.[/p][/quote]Why do they keep letting you out of your room?, why can't your carer lock the computer away and lose the key![/p][/quote]simple I have more brains than you, so they wont lock me up. jake777
  • Score: -2

6:58pm Sun 9 Mar 14

tomass says...

" A report by transport officials said none of the increases was “significant” " - This isn't a story. The story is that the data isn't useful.
" A report by transport officials said none of the increases was “significant” " [sic] - This isn't a story. The story is that the data isn't useful. tomass
  • 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