Lendal Bridge secrets revealed

A Lendal Bridge closure sign at the junction of Leeman Road and Station Road

A Lendal Bridge closure sign at the junction of Leeman Road and Station Road

First published in News Exclusive by

SECRET emails have revealed months of wrangling and apparent confusion between senior council figures over York’s controversial Lendal Bridge trial.

The exchanges, obtained by The Press, also reveal previously unseen survey findings showing three-quarters of the 1,200 people polled believed the restrictions had harmed York.

The emails show:

• Transport boss Dave Merrett said in October the signs were confusing and should be improved, and complained in January about the time taken to install new signs.

• Despite this, council officials told colleagues they must maintain the signs had been adequate, and that to say otherwise would jeopardise their ability to fight appeals.

• The independent report into the trial will say people now believe York is harder to access than before

• Three-quarters of people surveyed think the trial has damaged York

• One official said “the unfortunate truth” of the trial is that cutting city-centre traffic will do little to reduce air pollution, a key reason given for the restrictions

• Council bosses were unhappy that an amnesty from fines during the first week of the trial became public knowledge

• A “yellow card” warning scheme was considered but rejected due to DVLA advice that turned out to be wrong

• The council was warned last July the scheme was likely to go over-budget, but an official suggested the precise amount of Government funding should be blurred.

In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws.

The six-month experiment banning private traffic between 10.30am and 5pm every day, officially ends today, but the restrictions will remain pending a long-term decision by the council cabinet.

The emails, released to The Press under the Freedom of Information Act, show using rising bollards to prevent unauthorised traffic accessing the bridge was ruled out because of cost, concerns about their effectiveness and potential delays to buses if they failed.

The council also discussed amending the restrictions to cater for minibuses but Darren Richardson, director of city and environmental services, said that would mean restarting the trial, which would be “a disaster”.

Coun Dave Merrett, cabinet member for transport, also claimed he was given “incorrect advice” from officials over whether warning letters could be sent to drivers who breached the bridge rules.

The “yellow card, red card” approach – advocated by Visit York – was ruled out before the trial began, after the council was advised by the DVLA that its database could not be used to issue warning letters. The DVLA later said these letters could be sent, but by then fines had already started being handed out.

Coun Merrett said it was “unhelpful” that he only discovered this in a general communications update and asked: “Did we actually robustly test the legal position with them [the DVLA] in the first place”, querying whether a warning scheme could be brought in despite the possibility for “further embarrassment and confusion”.

On January 23, Coun Merrett emailed officials about “enhanced” signs and told them they needed to “get these signs in ASAP” in order to “avoid being seen to be undertaking wasteful expenditure” or face accusations of being “too late”.

About 30 per cent of the scheme’s funding has come from the Government’s Better Bus Area Fund, believed to be about £50,000. When budget concerns were raised last July, Ruth Stephenson, the council’s head of sustainable transport service, emailed colleagues saying: “I would prefer not to specifically mention the amount again and say the trial is being supported by Government funding.”


Revealing email messages

Revelations found in the secret emails included:

• Council official Simon Parrett told Coun Merrett in December: “On the air quality side, it is an unfortunate truth that even removing quite large volumes of traffic would have little impact on overall air quality.”

• Council leader James Alexander, in an email exchange with Darren Richardson, said it was “disappointing” that a first-week fines amnesty had been made public as it could “undermine the integrity of the trial”.

• Officials admitted feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York, was “very disappointing”, and also suggested expected improvements to bus times were not being seen. They claimed views may have been swayed by respondents being fined or through media coverage and anti-trial campaigns.

• Last September, Coun Merrett said one of the signs notifying drivers of the trial, on Station Rise, “feels very confusing”. He said he had been “disappointed at the initial high level” of fines.

• During the trial’s early stages, transport official Richard Wood told city leaders more AA signs could be installed “but the challenge of getting them read remains”. He said many people were following sat nav systems which directed them over the bridge “as expected”.

• Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”.

• Responding to criticism from Coun Merrett about his party’s stance on the trial, then-Conservative leader Coun Ian Gillies said in November that he had not criticised it when it started but he had come to believe York’s reputation was being harmed. Coun Gillies said he accepted “we cannot stand still” and “perhaps the eventual solution will be more drastic than closing just one bridge”.


Trial ‘not to generate revenue’

A City of York Council spokeswoman said: “Officers need to be able to correspond with each other; using their collective experience to debate decisions and provide advice on schemes like Lendal Bridge, prior to final decisions being made.

“Throughout the trial the council has continued to promote that York is open for business, but some media coverage has not helped this by portraying York’s accessibility in a negative light.

“However, in reality the latest half-term footfall figures are the highest on record demonstrating that York has been both accessible and well utilised during this period.

"York is a fantastic city with much to offer and the aim of the Lendal Bridge six-month trial was not to generate revenue, but to reduce traffic going over the bridge and through the city centre, as part of a long-term vision to create an even more attractive and thriving city centre for everyone.”

She said the council had deliberated about publicising the amnesty, over fear of causing confusion, and had repeatedly said the signs met Department for Transport standards.


‘Internal debate can be taken out of context’

COUNCILLOR Tracey Simpson-Laing said last night: “My comments relate to the fact that internal debate can be taken out of context when simply reading emails – as has this – as emails are not the best place for debate.

“But in fact what this shows is a healthy debate within the Labour Group, proving that we are completely undecided as a group until the full facts have been presented, despite what some might think and this is always what I have said”.

Comments (154)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:07pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Knavesmire view says...

Haha, good work Press. TSL really is a disgrace and this shows just how bad things are, our Council is rotten to the core.
The Muppett show continues for now but 2015 will see them turfed out and our great City can look to rebuild it's reputation.
Haha, good work Press. TSL really is a disgrace and this shows just how bad things are, our Council is rotten to the core. The Muppett show continues for now but 2015 will see them turfed out and our great City can look to rebuild it's reputation. Knavesmire view
  • Score: 1301

12:16pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Platform9 says...

The sign in the photo reads "Lendal Bridge Closed 10:30 - 5pm"

And then drivers see traffic crossing the bridge and think "Oh the sign must have been left on from yesterday as traffic is clearly using the bridge and no work is going on?"

Very misleading wording
The sign in the photo reads "Lendal Bridge Closed 10:30 - 5pm" And then drivers see traffic crossing the bridge and think "Oh the sign must have been left on from yesterday as traffic is clearly using the bridge and no work is going on?" Very misleading wording Platform9
  • Score: 847

12:18pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Oaklands Resident says...

Much as expected. The "trial" was introduced before proper signage and advertising had been agreed.

Now the Council must publish immediately the results of its survey of public opinion which it concluded yesterday. They've used "survey monkey" which provides real time results.

No excuse for delay.
Much as expected. The "trial" was introduced before proper signage and advertising had been agreed. Now the Council must publish immediately the results of its survey of public opinion which it concluded yesterday. They've used "survey monkey" which provides real time results. No excuse for delay. Oaklands Resident
  • Score: 521

12:22pm Thu 27 Feb 14

JHardacre says...

Platform9 wrote:
The sign in the photo reads "Lendal Bridge Closed 10:30 - 5pm"

And then drivers see traffic crossing the bridge and think "Oh the sign must have been left on from yesterday as traffic is clearly using the bridge and no work is going on?"

Very misleading wording
Also misleading is having the amber traffic light in the position normally occupied by the red light.
[quote][p][bold]Platform9[/bold] wrote: The sign in the photo reads "Lendal Bridge Closed 10:30 - 5pm" And then drivers see traffic crossing the bridge and think "Oh the sign must have been left on from yesterday as traffic is clearly using the bridge and no work is going on?" Very misleading wording[/p][/quote]Also misleading is having the amber traffic light in the position normally occupied by the red light. JHardacre
  • Score: 610

12:23pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Ichabod76 says...

In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws.

Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?
In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws. Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ? Ichabod76
  • Score: 754

12:24pm Thu 27 Feb 14

livewithit says...

Well done to the 2 reporters for bringing these facts to public view.
BUT what a can of worms.
Disgusted to see some of the details in here like "shutting down an email discussion" to avoid comeback.
This must surely show now what we all have come to see over the months, that the current council are not fit for purpose !
The longer this goes on the more tainted it alll becomes and it will be the citizens of York who suffer in the long run on many counts.
What can the good people of York do to put a stop to these badly thought up schemes. !
Well done to the 2 reporters for bringing these facts to public view. BUT what a can of worms. Disgusted to see some of the details in here like "shutting down an email discussion" to avoid comeback. This must surely show now what we all have come to see over the months, that the current council are not fit for purpose ! The longer this goes on the more tainted it alll becomes and it will be the citizens of York who suffer in the long run on many counts. What can the good people of York do to put a stop to these badly thought up schemes. ! livewithit
  • Score: 436

12:31pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Priceless York council, you couldn't make it up.

Here comes the spin machine in 3...2...1...
Priceless York council, you couldn't make it up. Here comes the spin machine in 3...2...1... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 5

12:34pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.
Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 403

12:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.
None of the above however *forces* them to open it, the spin machine will carry on...
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.[/p][/quote]None of the above however *forces* them to open it, the spin machine will carry on... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 446

12:44pm Thu 27 Feb 14

ouseswimmer says...

So they know its a mess but want to continue? Why is the trial over but the bridge still closed? Is this legal?
So they know its a mess but want to continue? Why is the trial over but the bridge still closed? Is this legal? ouseswimmer
  • Score: 424

12:48pm Thu 27 Feb 14

rking1977 says...

Good piece of journalism, York Press - well done.
Good piece of journalism, York Press - well done. rking1977
  • Score: 125

12:50pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.
None of the above however *forces* them to open it, the spin machine will carry on...
I know it's sad really. But they failed with their key objective which was never realistic or measurable. If anything it will force them into keeping it and sinking more money into it... 600k in abortive costs would cause outrage. They will try salvage it. But it can't be done. It now serves no purpose.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.[/p][/quote]None of the above however *forces* them to open it, the spin machine will carry on...[/p][/quote]I know it's sad really. But they failed with their key objective which was never realistic or measurable. If anything it will force them into keeping it and sinking more money into it... 600k in abortive costs would cause outrage. They will try salvage it. But it can't be done. It now serves no purpose. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 155

12:52pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Kevin Turvey says...

Ichabod76 says...
‘Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?’

Some of us never did in the first place!


Well well well what have we here then.

Incompetence, deceit, attempted cover ups, PR spin, contempt for the York council tax payer, voter and visitor!

I wonder is it like this on every issue in those expensive new ivory towers?
With the honor of serving your community also comes the responsibility of office, if you get it wrong then time to face up to that responsibility.

Sorry I forgot you are not doing this out of altruism are you?
Public office should be for open and honest people. So on that basis:

Resign now Alexander, Merrett and Simply wrong and I mean NOW!

PS:
Can’t wait for the evening scores on the doors elves to get onto this one!
Ichabod76 says... ‘Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?’ Some of us never did in the first place! Well well well what have we here then. Incompetence, deceit, attempted cover ups, PR spin, contempt for the York council tax payer, voter and visitor! I wonder is it like this on every issue in those expensive new ivory towers? With the honor of serving your community also comes the responsibility of office, if you get it wrong then time to face up to that responsibility. Sorry I forgot you are not doing this out of altruism are you? Public office should be for open and honest people. So on that basis: Resign now Alexander, Merrett and Simply wrong and I mean NOW! PS: Can’t wait for the evening scores on the doors elves to get onto this one! Kevin Turvey
  • Score: 141

12:55pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Platform9 wrote:
The sign in the photo reads "Lendal Bridge Closed 10:30 - 5pm" And then drivers see traffic crossing the bridge and think "Oh the sign must have been left on from yesterday as traffic is clearly using the bridge and no work is going on?" Very misleading wording
and the arrow pointing left where the happens to be a left hand turn.
[quote][p][bold]Platform9[/bold] wrote: The sign in the photo reads "Lendal Bridge Closed 10:30 - 5pm" And then drivers see traffic crossing the bridge and think "Oh the sign must have been left on from yesterday as traffic is clearly using the bridge and no work is going on?" Very misleading wording[/p][/quote]and the arrow pointing left where the happens to be a left hand turn. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 96

12:58pm Thu 27 Feb 14

The Great Buda says...

This is seriously good trolling by the Counil, because this can't be serious right?
This is seriously good trolling by the Counil, because this can't be serious right? The Great Buda
  • Score: 101

12:58pm Thu 27 Feb 14

whitehorse says...

Beware email, in case it comes back and bites you on the ****. Well, this has shown Jimmy and his pals up for the fools they are.
Beware email, in case it comes back and bites you on the ****. Well, this has shown Jimmy and his pals up for the fools they are. whitehorse
  • Score: 78

12:59pm Thu 27 Feb 14

livewithit says...

Further....

So to summ up the above article:-

Measures = unclear all along
Funding = fudged
Sinage = inadequate and changed during trial
council process = flawed and corrupt
Air quality = myth
Legality (DVLA) = not investigated thoroughly

Please can someone from the "cabinet" respond to these ?

And by the way don't quote improved bus times

Lets see what positives the "cabinet" can come up with.

If not then OPEN THE BRIDGE !
Further.... So to summ up the above article:- Measures = unclear all along Funding = fudged Sinage = inadequate and changed during trial council process = flawed and corrupt Air quality = myth Legality (DVLA) = not investigated thoroughly Please can someone from the "cabinet" respond to these ? And by the way don't quote improved bus times Lets see what positives the "cabinet" can come up with. If not then OPEN THE BRIDGE ! livewithit
  • Score: 4437

1:00pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Stealth-Taxi says...

Who is responsible for all the negative scoring ? (which will definately happen later). The press need to look into this !!!!!
Who is responsible for all the negative scoring ? (which will definately happen later). The press need to look into this !!!!! Stealth-Taxi
  • Score: 5015

1:04pm Thu 27 Feb 14

nowthen says...

Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”.......
.. Far too late James; you can apply as much Teflon as you like but it won't wash. The Press article merely confirms what we all already know. The Cabinet has disengaged the electorate from day one , the damage has been done and you'll all get your reward at the next elections.
Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”....... .. Far too late James; you can apply as much Teflon as you like but it won't wash. The Press article merely confirms what we all already know. The Cabinet has disengaged the electorate from day one , the damage has been done and you'll all get your reward at the next elections. nowthen
  • Score: 3733

1:05pm Thu 27 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

No surprises, the spend, spend, spend Labour administration is only economical when it comes to the truth.

Open, honest, transparent, NO.

Credible, NO.

You have no qualities or reason to carry on.
No surprises, the spend, spend, spend Labour administration is only economical when it comes to the truth. Open, honest, transparent, NO. Credible, NO. You have no qualities or reason to carry on. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 84

1:12pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Gazz (Within the Walls) says...

Can we please vote these absolute muppets out next year now! Total farce! Not to mention the money making scheme of changing the restriction hours on Coppergate!!!
Can we please vote these absolute muppets out next year now! Total farce! Not to mention the money making scheme of changing the restriction hours on Coppergate!!! Gazz (Within the Walls)
  • Score: 79

1:18pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Major Bloodnok says...

Mr Alexander reminds me of Nero......He fiddled while Rome burned .....Mr Alexander....doodles
Mr Alexander reminds me of Nero......He fiddled while Rome burned .....Mr Alexander....doodles Major Bloodnok
  • Score: 85

1:25pm Thu 27 Feb 14

WhyEver says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.
None of the above however *forces* them to open it, the spin machine will carry on...
I know it's sad really. But they failed with their key objective which was never realistic or measurable. If anything it will force them into keeping it and sinking more money into it... 600k in abortive costs would cause outrage. They will try salvage it. But it can't be done. It now serves no purpose.
The cabinet will delay any decision as long as possible, hoping the spin will start to work. The BBC news article says the decision will be taken "by May" so that's another 2-3 months of fines the council can rake in.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: Anyone with a brain already knew the above. Well done press and I hope the air pollution fanatics stay quiet now and we can get the bridge opened again.[/p][/quote]None of the above however *forces* them to open it, the spin machine will carry on...[/p][/quote]I know it's sad really. But they failed with their key objective which was never realistic or measurable. If anything it will force them into keeping it and sinking more money into it... 600k in abortive costs would cause outrage. They will try salvage it. But it can't be done. It now serves no purpose.[/p][/quote]The cabinet will delay any decision as long as possible, hoping the spin will start to work. The BBC news article says the decision will be taken "by May" so that's another 2-3 months of fines the council can rake in. WhyEver
  • Score: 110

1:28pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

So lets just look at some spending this year... £550k on this project assuming they got 50k from the government. 500k on 20 is plenty.... was the area next to the minster around 500k? if so then that is around 1.5m of our money that has been wasted. (AND OTHERS PLANNED)

This isn’t small fry at all. I'm pretty sure every reader out there could think of better ways of spending this. If it be fixing the pavement in parliament street (This one is mine i admit), fixing damaged roads, improving public facilities for youngsters (sports etc)... the list could go on.

The fact is now they have voted we give them more money next year while they are still going to cut services. I can only imagine that other projects have been managed equally as bad financially and there are a lot more of skeletons to come out of the closet. Other pet schemes are going ahead that offer no improvement and will not attract additional revenue.

What is happening to this city recently is disgraceful and i hope it is given the media attention it deserves. I was never bothered about politics but now i find it interesting how such incompetent people are given so much power? its like putting the chuckle brothers in charge of the treasury.
So lets just look at some spending this year... £550k on this project assuming they got 50k from the government. 500k on 20 is plenty.... was the area next to the minster around 500k? if so then that is around 1.5m of our money that has been wasted. (AND OTHERS PLANNED) This isn’t small fry at all. I'm pretty sure every reader out there could think of better ways of spending this. If it be fixing the pavement in parliament street (This one is mine i admit), fixing damaged roads, improving public facilities for youngsters (sports etc)... the list could go on. The fact is now they have voted we give them more money next year while they are still going to cut services. I can only imagine that other projects have been managed equally as bad financially and there are a lot more of skeletons to come out of the closet. Other pet schemes are going ahead that offer no improvement and will not attract additional revenue. What is happening to this city recently is disgraceful and i hope it is given the media attention it deserves. I was never bothered about politics but now i find it interesting how such incompetent people are given so much power? its like putting the chuckle brothers in charge of the treasury. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 78

1:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

Ichabod76 wrote:
In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws. Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?
Could they/we ever ?

Following on from the recent failed attempt by Coun Alexander and Coun Simpson-Laing to gag citizens (public speakers) at council meetings, we now see yet more underhanded dealings in hiding the facts.

This has brought the Council into total disrepute, and those responsible for this manipulation and shambolic Lendal Bridge fiasco should resign.

They are a disgrace !
[quote][p][bold]Ichabod76[/bold] wrote: In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws. Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?[/p][/quote]Could they/we ever ? Following on from the recent failed attempt by Coun Alexander and Coun Simpson-Laing to gag citizens (public speakers) at council meetings, we now see yet more underhanded dealings in hiding the facts. This has brought the Council into total disrepute, and those responsible for this manipulation and shambolic Lendal Bridge fiasco should resign. They are a disgrace ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 104

1:43pm Thu 27 Feb 14

the original Homer says...

Excellent reporting work, I hope the National media now pick this story up.

What this shows is a Council obsessed with hiding anything which might look bad, and even telling staff to lie to cover earlier lies. Very little evidence of any actions actrually intended to serve the public, which is what we pay them to do.

Alexander and Simpson-Laing come out of this very badly. Interestingly, Merrett may be the voice of reason. Never thought I'd say that, but he does seem to have been trying to fight a valid corner on the signage.

The bit about Alexander not wanting Merrett to do the interview might not have been to protect Merrett. Alexander may have been scared that Merrett would make his stance on the signs known.

This council know they are doing wrong, but rather than stop, they simply think up ways to try to hide things. Any actions taken "in case there's a freedom of information enquiry" should be illegal. It shows they are happy to do wrong provided they think they won't be found out.. - tough luck - it didn't work.

Best reporting I've seen in a long time - awards shoudl be due for that
Excellent reporting work, I hope the National media now pick this story up. What this shows is a Council obsessed with hiding anything which might look bad, and even telling staff to lie to cover earlier lies. Very little evidence of any actions actrually intended to serve the public, which is what we pay them to do. Alexander and Simpson-Laing come out of this very badly. Interestingly, Merrett may be the voice of reason. Never thought I'd say that, but he does seem to have been trying to fight a valid corner on the signage. The bit about Alexander not wanting Merrett to do the interview might not have been to protect Merrett. Alexander may have been scared that Merrett would make his stance on the signs known. This council know they are doing wrong, but rather than stop, they simply think up ways to try to hide things. Any actions taken "in case there's a freedom of information enquiry" should be illegal. It shows they are happy to do wrong provided they think they won't be found out.. - tough luck - it didn't work. Best reporting I've seen in a long time - awards shoudl be due for that the original Homer
  • Score: 122

1:46pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Funnyian says...

Will anyone now admit they were wrong if so how about a refund for all the poor tourists who have been fined?
Will anyone now admit they were wrong if so how about a refund for all the poor tourists who have been fined? Funnyian
  • Score: 103

1:48pm Thu 27 Feb 14

wildthing666 says...

• Council official Simon Parrett told Coun Merrett in December: “On the air quality side, it is an unfortunate truth that even removing quite large volumes of traffic would have little impact on overall air quality.”

On the air quality side it has done absolutely nothing for York as a whole, the council have just pushed traffic from one part of the city to another as this seems the case. The air quality is no better now than what it was when the trial started as air quality will be measured by city not by street you just cannot measure air quality by streets, as many have said the council are corrupt roll on 2015 when they are given the order of the boot!
• Council official Simon Parrett told Coun Merrett in December: “On the air quality side, it is an unfortunate truth that even removing quite large volumes of traffic would have little impact on overall air quality.” On the air quality side it has done absolutely nothing for York as a whole, the council have just pushed traffic from one part of the city to another as this seems the case. The air quality is no better now than what it was when the trial started as air quality will be measured by city not by street you just cannot measure air quality by streets, as many have said the council are corrupt roll on 2015 when they are given the order of the boot! wildthing666
  • Score: 114

1:51pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Lunatic says...

"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion. Lunatic
  • Score: 86

1:54pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Lunatic wrote:
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....)
I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet. AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 85

1:56pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

So far all 27 scores apart from one (which is 0) are +ve.

This is how they stand (all +ve):

280 (could have been tampered with by hacker at lunch time ?)
106, (Ditto)
32, 13, 40, 40, 34, 23, 25, 12, 23, 22, 18, 28, 7, 0, 14, 17, 12, 15, 11, 12, 12, 3, 7, 1, & 1

The truth is the council are not trusted, and the majority are against the Lendal Bridge closure - the untampered votes and the comments are evidence of this.

There isn't anyone defending the council on this. they have lost credibility, lost our trust, lost this issue, and Labour will lose the election next year !
So far all 27 scores apart from one (which is 0) are +ve. This is how they stand (all +ve): 280 (could have been tampered with by hacker at lunch time ?) 106, (Ditto) 32, 13, 40, 40, 34, 23, 25, 12, 23, 22, 18, 28, 7, 0, 14, 17, 12, 15, 11, 12, 12, 3, 7, 1, & 1 The truth is the council are not trusted, and the majority are against the Lendal Bridge closure - the untampered votes and the comments are evidence of this. There isn't anyone defending the council on this. they have lost credibility, lost our trust, lost this issue, and Labour will lose the election next year ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 109

1:59pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Lunatic says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....)
I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience.

From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating. Lunatic
  • Score: 182

1:59pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Can't all be wrong says...

Shame on you YCC, you have done more to discredit and trivialise local politics than is imaginable. You have nothing left to offer, you are manipulative
shallow, discredited and dishonest.
Well done the Press, don't stop here, keep digging, you have done more to help the residents of York than this Council could ever do.
Shame on you YCC, you have done more to discredit and trivialise local politics than is imaginable. You have nothing left to offer, you are manipulative shallow, discredited and dishonest. Well done the Press, don't stop here, keep digging, you have done more to help the residents of York than this Council could ever do. Can't all be wrong
  • Score: 110

2:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

yorkonafork says...

wildthing666 wrote:
• Council official Simon Parrett told Coun Merrett in December: “On the air quality side, it is an unfortunate truth that even removing quite large volumes of traffic would have little impact on overall air quality.”

On the air quality side it has done absolutely nothing for York as a whole, the council have just pushed traffic from one part of the city to another as this seems the case. The air quality is no better now than what it was when the trial started as air quality will be measured by city not by street you just cannot measure air quality by streets, as many have said the council are corrupt roll on 2015 when they are given the order of the boot!
I thought that people were breathing in wonderful fresh air and skipping over the bridge nowadays?

This article has shown a few people up today big style. And I say only a few, because how many really support it all anyway!?

Well done to The Press as well. This is the kind of reporting we're after! To quote a regular commenter on here "Brilliant, love it, more please!"
[quote][p][bold]wildthing666[/bold] wrote: • Council official Simon Parrett told Coun Merrett in December: “On the air quality side, it is an unfortunate truth that even removing quite large volumes of traffic would have little impact on overall air quality.” On the air quality side it has done absolutely nothing for York as a whole, the council have just pushed traffic from one part of the city to another as this seems the case. The air quality is no better now than what it was when the trial started as air quality will be measured by city not by street you just cannot measure air quality by streets, as many have said the council are corrupt roll on 2015 when they are given the order of the boot![/p][/quote]I thought that people were breathing in wonderful fresh air and skipping over the bridge nowadays? This article has shown a few people up today big style. And I say only a few, because how many really support it all anyway!? Well done to The Press as well. This is the kind of reporting we're after! To quote a regular commenter on here "Brilliant, love it, more please!" yorkonafork
  • Score: 71

2:04pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....)
I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience.

From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.[/p][/quote]Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn? AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 82

2:06pm Thu 27 Feb 14

MarkyMarkMark says...

I'm quite impressed. This feels like some real investigative journalism - well done The Press.

I think the most stunning thing it reveals is that most of our elected leaders haven't yet grasped that email is not a secure form of communication! And when they do understand that (only single case so far!) it's a matter of concern to them because they're concerned that it might be used against them later - not an easily defensible position for an "open and honest" democracy.

I don't suppose any heads will roll as a result of this revelation (except for the unlucky person who released the emails to the press?), but I do hope it's remembered at the council elections 2015. It'll be fun talking to Councillors on the doorstep, and would certainly make me think twice about voting for any of them at all. (But what's the alternative? No better, I suspect.)

Oh yes, - Pleasure Barge - no. Arts Barge..... :-)
I'm quite impressed. This feels like some real investigative journalism - well done The Press. I think the most stunning thing it reveals is that most of our elected leaders haven't yet grasped that email is not a secure form of communication! And when they do understand that (only single case so far!) it's a matter of concern to them because they're concerned that it might be used against them later - not an easily defensible position for an "open and honest" democracy. I don't suppose any heads will roll as a result of this revelation (except for the unlucky person who released the emails to the press?), but I do hope it's remembered at the council elections 2015. It'll be fun talking to Councillors on the doorstep, and would certainly make me think twice about voting for any of them at all. (But what's the alternative? No better, I suspect.) Oh yes, [whitehorse] - Pleasure Barge - no. Arts Barge..... :-) MarkyMarkMark
  • Score: 48

2:10pm Thu 27 Feb 14

chelk says...

From the article it seems that Council members have encouraged people to Lie, Mislead and Hide the truth. How can anybody trust them again. I am of the opinion that you can tell when this lot are lying "You can see their lips moving". The Muppet Show rolls ever onward
From the article it seems that Council members have encouraged people to Lie, Mislead and Hide the truth. How can anybody trust them again. I am of the opinion that you can tell when this lot are lying "You can see their lips moving". The Muppet Show rolls ever onward chelk
  • Score: 98

2:11pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

the original Homer wrote:
Excellent reporting work, I hope the National media now pick this story up. What this shows is a Council obsessed with hiding anything which might look bad, and even telling staff to lie to cover earlier lies. Very little evidence of any actions actrually intended to serve the public, which is what we pay them to do. Alexander and Simpson-Laing come out of this very badly. Interestingly, Merrett may be the voice of reason. Never thought I'd say that, but he does seem to have been trying to fight a valid corner on the signage. The bit about Alexander not wanting Merrett to do the interview might not have been to protect Merrett. Alexander may have been scared that Merrett would make his stance on the signs known. This council know they are doing wrong, but rather than stop, they simply think up ways to try to hide things. Any actions taken "in case there's a freedom of information enquiry" should be illegal. It shows they are happy to do wrong provided they think they won't be found out.. - tough luck - it didn't work. Best reporting I've seen in a long time - awards shoudl be due for that
Be careful giving Merrett any credit for appearing to be acting fairly - he's good at acting !

He is careful to ensure that at meetings (which are minuted/recorded) and in correspondence, he gives the illusion of being totally straight - he knows how to play the system. He has his own agenda, and works the system.

I was at a meeting with Merrett, Alexander ansd Simpson-Laing in October 2011, with three other non-council individuals. I referred to a council document and certain figures which Coun Merrett denied existed. After the meeting I referred to the document, page number and paragraph/table in an email to Coun Merrett and ciopied in all who were present, as evidence that I was correct and Coun Merrett was wrong. Needless to say, I did not receive a reply from any of the three councillors. Since then two of them refuse to engage with me, but Coun Merrett still acknowledges my emails, thus giving the illusion that he is acting fairly - YES he is..... ACTING !
[quote][p][bold]the original Homer[/bold] wrote: Excellent reporting work, I hope the National media now pick this story up. What this shows is a Council obsessed with hiding anything which might look bad, and even telling staff to lie to cover earlier lies. Very little evidence of any actions actrually intended to serve the public, which is what we pay them to do. Alexander and Simpson-Laing come out of this very badly. Interestingly, Merrett may be the voice of reason. Never thought I'd say that, but he does seem to have been trying to fight a valid corner on the signage. The bit about Alexander not wanting Merrett to do the interview might not have been to protect Merrett. Alexander may have been scared that Merrett would make his stance on the signs known. This council know they are doing wrong, but rather than stop, they simply think up ways to try to hide things. Any actions taken "in case there's a freedom of information enquiry" should be illegal. It shows they are happy to do wrong provided they think they won't be found out.. - tough luck - it didn't work. Best reporting I've seen in a long time - awards shoudl be due for that[/p][/quote]Be careful giving Merrett any credit for appearing to be acting fairly - he's good at acting ! He is careful to ensure that at meetings (which are minuted/recorded) and in correspondence, he gives the illusion of being totally straight - he knows how to play the system. He has his own agenda, and works the system. I was at a meeting with Merrett, Alexander ansd Simpson-Laing in October 2011, with three other non-council individuals. I referred to a council document and certain figures which Coun Merrett denied existed. After the meeting I referred to the document, page number and paragraph/table in an email to Coun Merrett and ciopied in all who were present, as evidence that I was correct and Coun Merrett was wrong. Needless to say, I did not receive a reply from any of the three councillors. Since then two of them refuse to engage with me, but Coun Merrett still acknowledges my emails, thus giving the illusion that he is acting fairly - YES he is..... ACTING ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 92

2:13pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Lunatic says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....)
I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience.

From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?
You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is.

To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual.

My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be.

I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.[/p][/quote]Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?[/p][/quote]You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another. Lunatic
  • Score: 170

2:22pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....)
I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience.

From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?
You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is.

To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual.

My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be.

I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.
Part of the problem is that there is almost no way that this information can be proved.
At best we have:
Bus times (at best they are static, at worst they are worse)
Pollution levels (We know from this article that's not improved.

After that it's a bit hard.
Though despite everything public opinion should mean something, I know the public as a whole don't know everything, but nothing here suggests the council are doing this for any real good of the city...
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.[/p][/quote]Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?[/p][/quote]You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.[/p][/quote]Part of the problem is that there is almost no way that this information can be proved. At best we have: Bus times (at best they are static, at worst they are worse) Pollution levels (We know from this article that's not improved. After that it's a bit hard. Though despite everything public opinion should mean something, I know the public as a whole don't know everything, but nothing here suggests the council are doing this for any real good of the city... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 257

2:25pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?
You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.
They have. it showed that bus times had not reduced. Traffic elsewhere was worse. visitors were not happy as around 35k of them were fined. Business revenue in the city centre was down. And now the air polution is not reduced which we all knew was fact anyway. It was factually over budget. The signs were inadequate which if you passed them was a fact.

People opinions have been based on the above and all of them have been facts from the start of the project.
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.[/p][/quote]Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?[/p][/quote]You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.[/p][/quote]They have. it showed that bus times had not reduced. Traffic elsewhere was worse. visitors were not happy as around 35k of them were fined. Business revenue in the city centre was down. And now the air polution is not reduced which we all knew was fact anyway. It was factually over budget. The signs were inadequate which if you passed them was a fact. People opinions have been based on the above and all of them have been facts from the start of the project. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 97

2:35pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....? AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 120

2:35pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Lunatic says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?
You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.
They have. it showed that bus times had not reduced. Traffic elsewhere was worse. visitors were not happy as around 35k of them were fined. Business revenue in the city centre was down. And now the air polution is not reduced which we all knew was fact anyway. It was factually over budget. The signs were inadequate which if you passed them was a fact.

People opinions have been based on the above and all of them have been facts from the start of the project.
Any chance of a link?
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.[/p][/quote]Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?[/p][/quote]You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.[/p][/quote]They have. it showed that bus times had not reduced. Traffic elsewhere was worse. visitors were not happy as around 35k of them were fined. Business revenue in the city centre was down. And now the air polution is not reduced which we all knew was fact anyway. It was factually over budget. The signs were inadequate which if you passed them was a fact. People opinions have been based on the above and all of them have been facts from the start of the project.[/p][/quote]Any chance of a link? Lunatic
  • Score: 188

2:36pm Thu 27 Feb 14

MorkofYork says...

They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.
They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty. MorkofYork
  • Score: 94

2:38pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

MorkofYork wrote:
They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.
Think there is any chance of a FOI for that?
[quote][p][bold]MorkofYork[/bold] wrote: They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.[/p][/quote]Think there is any chance of a FOI for that? AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 93

2:42pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Stealth-Taxi says...

My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.
My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into. Stealth-Taxi
  • Score: 98

2:46pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Stealth-Taxi wrote:
My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.
The software they have will be have been bought in and that flaw exists in the software. Without them buying a new message board system (probably quite expensive) nothing can change.
Unfortunately it'll be here for a while I'm afraid.
[quote][p][bold]Stealth-Taxi[/bold] wrote: My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.[/p][/quote]The software they have will be have been bought in and that flaw exists in the software. Without them buying a new message board system (probably quite expensive) nothing can change. Unfortunately it'll be here for a while I'm afraid. AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 103

2:47pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Stealth-Taxi wrote:
My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.
mine too.. i did get a warning the other day for calling hoofherted a moron....
[quote][p][bold]Stealth-Taxi[/bold] wrote: My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.[/p][/quote]mine too.. i did get a warning the other day for calling hoofherted a moron.... Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 85

2:49pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Lunatic wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Lunatic wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.
That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.
Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?
You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.
They have. it showed that bus times had not reduced. Traffic elsewhere was worse. visitors were not happy as around 35k of them were fined. Business revenue in the city centre was down. And now the air polution is not reduced which we all knew was fact anyway. It was factually over budget. The signs were inadequate which if you passed them was a fact. People opinions have been based on the above and all of them have been facts from the start of the project.
Any chance of a link?
A lot of the articles have been published on this site. Certainly the bus one, traffic and fines. Pretty sure the signage has been made public for a long time too on here.

I dont agree with the traffic one as it says an additional 5-10mins off the top of my head but in reality it has delayed me about double that on average.
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]I think we can pretty saflely say if there was a major positive effect we'd have heard about it (and again and again an....) I think most people assumed on here that as we'd heard almost nothing that the result was mostly negative and being kept quiet.[/p][/quote]That's the thing, though; everybody's basing this on personal experience and belief... That's no way to make a decision. People keep telling me the traffic in York is worse than it ever was, the inner ringroad is in constant gridlock, etc, but this hasn't been true in my experience. From what I can personally see the closing of the bridge has had no major effect one way or another. And whilst I find the obfuscation and spin from the council deeply troubling, I find the mindless vitriol and diatribe from the other side equally as distressing and self-defeating.[/p][/quote]Still my point remains. If this trial is such a success why are the council not shouting it from the rooftops, surely that is the only way pubic opinion will turn?[/p][/quote]You're right. But that's not the point that I'm disputing. I accept the average York resident seems to base their decisions on personality and emotion rather than what is demonstrable and factual. Which is a real shame, but it is what it is. To say the trial is either a success or a disaster is introducing a false dichotomy. It could be fantastic, mildly beneficial, it could be marginally detrimental, a huge monumental disaster or it could be entirely ineffectual. My point is merely that I would rather form an opinion based on fact than emotion, and that I wish others would do the same. And that can't be done based on anecdote and what people "believe" the case to be. I'm strongly opposed to the closure. It's been a definite waste of money. But at the same time I don't think it's been a huge disaster for York. For the council, yes; I think it will cost them re-election. But for the city itself, its residents and its reputation? Any impact seems marginal, and I'd like to see some information that could actually prove this one way or another.[/p][/quote]They have. it showed that bus times had not reduced. Traffic elsewhere was worse. visitors were not happy as around 35k of them were fined. Business revenue in the city centre was down. And now the air polution is not reduced which we all knew was fact anyway. It was factually over budget. The signs were inadequate which if you passed them was a fact. People opinions have been based on the above and all of them have been facts from the start of the project.[/p][/quote]Any chance of a link?[/p][/quote]A lot of the articles have been published on this site. Certainly the bus one, traffic and fines. Pretty sure the signage has been made public for a long time too on here. I dont agree with the traffic one as it says an additional 5-10mins off the top of my head but in reality it has delayed me about double that on average. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 97

2:57pm Thu 27 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Can't all be wrong wrote:
Shame on you YCC, you have done more to discredit and trivialise local politics than is imaginable. You have nothing left to offer, you are manipulative
shallow, discredited and dishonest.
Well done the Press, don't stop here, keep digging, you have done more to help the residents of York than this Council could ever do.
Might do worse than investigate the links between a certain community pub and it's support for all things council.

Arts Barge
First (and only) to pay the living wage
Hot bed of support for Lendal Bridge restriction

Who might be specific share holders and why such a high level of coincidence.
[quote][p][bold]Can't all be wrong[/bold] wrote: Shame on you YCC, you have done more to discredit and trivialise local politics than is imaginable. You have nothing left to offer, you are manipulative shallow, discredited and dishonest. Well done the Press, don't stop here, keep digging, you have done more to help the residents of York than this Council could ever do.[/p][/quote]Might do worse than investigate the links between a certain community pub and it's support for all things council. Arts Barge First (and only) to pay the living wage Hot bed of support for Lendal Bridge restriction Who might be specific share holders and why such a high level of coincidence. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 119

2:59pm Thu 27 Feb 14

old_geezer says...

As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist.

Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary.

Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out. old_geezer
  • Score: 75

3:01pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Platform3 says...

Cllr Simpson-Laing is worried e-mail communications may be divulged to the electorate. So what does she do? She warns her colleagues by e-mail!!!

Does that give you the impression of someone with the thinking skills and competences required to deal with an issue as complex as traffic strategy?
Cllr Simpson-Laing is worried e-mail communications may be divulged to the electorate. So what does she do? She warns her colleagues by e-mail!!! Does that give you the impression of someone with the thinking skills and competences required to deal with an issue as complex as traffic strategy? Platform3
  • Score: 70

3:08pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

old_geezer wrote:
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist.

Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary.

Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
Oh well, that's ok eh, as long as it suits you eh... ;)
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.[/p][/quote]Oh well, that's ok eh, as long as it suits you eh... ;) AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: 55

3:25pm Thu 27 Feb 14

the original Homer says...

old_geezer wrote:
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
I'm sure siome people have gained by the trial and that opinion is just as valid as those who've lost.

I can't see how that suddenly makes the e-mails not damning though.

1 The signs are no good, but we have to keep saying they are OK or the fines won't stick
2 Can we stop these e-mails before people get to see the truth?
3 Keep quoting DVLA rules even though they aren't right, it deflects the flak
4 Can we get someone else to front the interviews, so people don't think it's us?
5 It's a shame people have found out we had to cancel some of the fines, they might find out we were lying about the signs.
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.[/p][/quote]I'm sure siome people have gained by the trial and that opinion is just as valid as those who've lost. I can't see how that suddenly makes the e-mails not damning though. 1 The signs are no good, but we have to keep saying they are OK or the fines won't stick 2 Can we stop these e-mails before people get to see the truth? 3 Keep quoting DVLA rules even though they aren't right, it deflects the flak 4 Can we get someone else to front the interviews, so people don't think it's us? 5 It's a shame people have found out we had to cancel some of the fines, they might find out we were lying about the signs. the original Homer
  • Score: 73

3:31pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
Can't all be wrong wrote: Shame on you YCC, you have done more to discredit and trivialise local politics than is imaginable. You have nothing left to offer, you are manipulative shallow, discredited and dishonest. Well done the Press, don't stop here, keep digging, you have done more to help the residents of York than this Council could ever do.
Might do worse than investigate the links between a certain community pub and it's support for all things council. Arts Barge First (and only) to pay the living wage Hot bed of support for Lendal Bridge restriction Who might be specific share holders and why such a high level of coincidence.
Hasn't anyone noticed this growing politicised 'movement' in York ?

Community Interest, Social Innovation, Third Sector etc etc.

The clues to this movements political origins are in some of the above words, just substitute an 'ity' for an 'ism' in one and add an 'ism' to another.

Some charities have also become more involved with York Council and are part of this movement; Nesta, FutureGov, Common Purpose and York's own JRF ! All of these are linked to one another (OneanOther TV too), with a certain political bias, and linked to a very senior City of York Council official.
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Can't all be wrong[/bold] wrote: Shame on you YCC, you have done more to discredit and trivialise local politics than is imaginable. You have nothing left to offer, you are manipulative shallow, discredited and dishonest. Well done the Press, don't stop here, keep digging, you have done more to help the residents of York than this Council could ever do.[/p][/quote]Might do worse than investigate the links between a certain community pub and it's support for all things council. Arts Barge First (and only) to pay the living wage Hot bed of support for Lendal Bridge restriction Who might be specific share holders and why such a high level of coincidence.[/p][/quote]Hasn't anyone noticed this growing politicised 'movement' in York ? Community Interest, Social Innovation, Third Sector etc etc. The clues to this movements political origins are in some of the above words, just substitute an 'ity' for an 'ism' in one and add an 'ism' to another. Some charities have also become more involved with York Council and are part of this movement; Nesta, FutureGov, Common Purpose and York's own JRF ! All of these are linked to one another (OneanOther TV too), with a certain political bias, and linked to a very senior City of York Council official. Badgers Drift
  • Score: 80

3:32pm Thu 27 Feb 14

bolero says...

Debate over. Thanks press. You can't discuss/debate with a bunch of lying, cheating, manipulative, deceptive, devious individuals like this lot. Read it quickly before it's deleted.
Debate over. Thanks press. You can't discuss/debate with a bunch of lying, cheating, manipulative, deceptive, devious individuals like this lot. Read it quickly before it's deleted. bolero
  • Score: 71

3:32pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

old_geezer wrote:
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.[/p][/quote]Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 58

3:34pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Redcap198 says...

Ichabod76 wrote:
In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws.

Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?
Never have believed a word that she has spoken, her and her sidekick boss are a disgrace to The good people of York, the sooner we can vote them out the better, I would love to see them do the honorable thing and resign for the mess they have created, no chance of that happening I suppose, lack of moral fibre springs to mind.
[quote][p][bold]Ichabod76[/bold] wrote: In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws. Can the people of York ever trust you now Tracey ?[/p][/quote]Never have believed a word that she has spoken, her and her sidekick boss are a disgrace to The good people of York, the sooner we can vote them out the better, I would love to see them do the honorable thing and resign for the mess they have created, no chance of that happening I suppose, lack of moral fibre springs to mind. Redcap198
  • Score: 43

3:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

piaggio1 says...

God I do hope some claims go in from drivers.
They lied n connived .
The worst tbing about this is their sheer contempt for the york tax payers..
God I do hope some claims go in from drivers. They lied n connived . The worst tbing about this is their sheer contempt for the york tax payers.. piaggio1
  • Score: 215

3:41pm Thu 27 Feb 14

PeenJay1 says...

In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws

"Talk about how governments, even Local Governements, should be transparent."
? Wouldn't be "NICE", if local members, were to look after the "Rights and Be Beneficial" to "THEIR" constituents?
In one exchange, deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws "Talk about how governments, even Local Governements, should be transparent." ? Wouldn't be "NICE", if local members, were to look after the "Rights and Be Beneficial" to "THEIR" constituents? PeenJay1
  • Score: 179

3:54pm Thu 27 Feb 14

acomblass says...

Thank you Press - please keep up the good work of exposing these people who have ruined our city. It is not only on the big, high profile issues like Lendal Bridge where the tax payers of York are suffering. I have no doubt that you will shortly uncover (or receive) e mails which have been sent to members of the public which show exactly what is going on and which is wrongly being blamed on government cuts. The national media and Private Eye's Rotten Boroughs column will have a field day! and readership of the Press will soar if they continue to provide us with good quality investigative journalism.
Thank you Press - please keep up the good work of exposing these people who have ruined our city. It is not only on the big, high profile issues like Lendal Bridge where the tax payers of York are suffering. I have no doubt that you will shortly uncover (or receive) e mails which have been sent to members of the public which show exactly what is going on and which is wrongly being blamed on government cuts. The national media and Private Eye's Rotten Boroughs column will have a field day! and readership of the Press will soar if they continue to provide us with good quality investigative journalism. acomblass
  • Score: 226

4:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Cheeky face says...

These e-mails don't surprise me. The transport team employees have been fudging replies from Aug to Dec. Then we public opinion was so convincing regarding poor signs etc they don't reply at all. My queries on "restricted access" and warning letters were with the council in Sept.

There was an issue with congestion and air quality but where is there real facts that the council have achieved their aims.

My view from the pitifully low replies to my questions is that the less senior council employees have been encouraged to spoil apologies with excuses.

I await the traffic appeals adjudicator's report on Coppergate.

Essex County council recently refunded over £1 back to "assumed traffic order transgressions". That was regarding a poorly signed bus lane in Colchester.
employees
These e-mails don't surprise me. The transport team employees have been fudging replies from Aug to Dec. Then we public opinion was so convincing regarding poor signs etc they don't reply at all. My queries on "restricted access" and warning letters were with the council in Sept. There was an issue with congestion and air quality but where is there real facts that the council have achieved their aims. My view from the pitifully low replies to my questions is that the less senior council employees have been encouraged to spoil apologies with excuses. I await the traffic appeals adjudicator's report on Coppergate. Essex County council recently refunded over £1 back to "assumed traffic order transgressions". That was regarding a poorly signed bus lane in Colchester. employees Cheeky face
  • Score: 237

4:07pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Cheeky face says...

Sorry I meant £1million! in the penultimate sentence of my comments of a few minutes ago. Colchester Gazette web-site has the details.

Norwich did a traffic calming measure a few years back and built 2 footbridges; one for shoppers and one primarily for football supporters.
I understand air quality DID NOT IMPROVE.

It is good reporting by the Press and it is interesting to see what happens at the next election.
Sorry I meant £1million! in the penultimate sentence of my comments of a few minutes ago. Colchester Gazette web-site has the details. Norwich did a traffic calming measure a few years back and built 2 footbridges; one for shoppers and one primarily for football supporters. I understand air quality DID NOT IMPROVE. It is good reporting by the Press and it is interesting to see what happens at the next election. Cheeky face
  • Score: 119

4:10pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

Well done York Press for this piece of excellent investigative journalism which has confirmed what many have long suspected - that this trial process has been a manipulated stitch-up by CYC.

The Council have lost credibility and respect, and certain councillors have lost all trust from the majority of York citizens. This is the end for Labour in York, they will never be trusted again whilst the triumvirate are involved at CYC. It is time for a vote of no confidence.
Well done York Press for this piece of excellent investigative journalism which has confirmed what many have long suspected - that this trial process has been a manipulated stitch-up by CYC. The Council have lost credibility and respect, and certain councillors have lost all trust from the majority of York citizens. This is the end for Labour in York, they will never be trusted again whilst the triumvirate are involved at CYC. It is time for a vote of no confidence. Badgers Drift
  • Score: 73

4:11pm Thu 27 Feb 14

nobby40 says...

MorkofYork wrote:
They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.
I must admit seeing two brand new 20 mph signs at the entrance to a cul de sac which must be all of 100 meters in length if not less did make me chuckle
[quote][p][bold]MorkofYork[/bold] wrote: They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.[/p][/quote]I must admit seeing two brand new 20 mph signs at the entrance to a cul de sac which must be all of 100 meters in length if not less did make me chuckle nobby40
  • Score: 77

4:14pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

nobby40 wrote:
MorkofYork wrote:
They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.
I must admit seeing two brand new 20 mph signs at the entrance to a cul de sac which must be all of 100 meters in length if not less did make me chuckle
You do have to wonder if the accident she had many years ago left her with lasting symptoms
[quote][p][bold]nobby40[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MorkofYork[/bold] wrote: They've been lying and cheating throughout the whole thing. Anna's doing the same thing with 20's plenty.[/p][/quote]I must admit seeing two brand new 20 mph signs at the entrance to a cul de sac which must be all of 100 meters in length if not less did make me chuckle[/p][/quote]You do have to wonder if the accident she had many years ago left her with lasting symptoms AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -41

4:22pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Dr Brian says...

Well done York Press

So basically the ruling Labour party have been lying to us on cost on signage on people's perceptions and TSL wants them to keep quiet and cover it up.

Too late you have been proved to be not trusted and I hope the Labour party nationally see how useless that Alexander has been and do not give him a safe Labour seat next year (which is all he basically wants - he has no interest in York!) His master plan will fail he will be voted out of council and will not have a seat in Westminster - how the mighty will fall!
Well done York Press So basically the ruling Labour party have been lying to us on cost on signage on people's perceptions and TSL wants them to keep quiet and cover it up. Too late you have been proved to be not trusted and I hope the Labour party nationally see how useless that Alexander has been and do not give him a safe Labour seat next year (which is all he basically wants - he has no interest in York!) His master plan will fail he will be voted out of council and will not have a seat in Westminster - how the mighty will fall! Dr Brian
  • Score: 142

4:25pm Thu 27 Feb 14

TheTruthHurts says...

I though the comments would fly in on this one. However once they hit about 75 in number they are going down quicker than they are going up lol
I though the comments would fly in on this one. However once they hit about 75 in number they are going down quicker than they are going up lol TheTruthHurts
  • Score: 62

4:28pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Woody G Mellor says...

Well done York Press!!!!! My renewed respect for you has gone through the roof!!
Well done York Press!!!!! My renewed respect for you has gone through the roof!! Woody G Mellor
  • Score: 66

4:32pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AnotherPointofView says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Stealth-Taxi wrote:
My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.
mine too.. i did get a warning the other day for calling hoofherted a moron....
Your warning was justified. It was an insult to morons.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stealth-Taxi[/bold] wrote: My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.[/p][/quote]mine too.. i did get a warning the other day for calling hoofherted a moron....[/p][/quote]Your warning was justified. It was an insult to morons. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: 65

4:43pm Thu 27 Feb 14

old_geezer says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
old_geezer wrote:
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.
Easy - as a pedestrian, the area is pleasanter to walk in and easier to cross the road (a letter here from a library user recently made the same point). As a cyclist I have fewer vehicles squeezing me against the kerb, as they usually don't have to avoid approaching vehicles - in fact sometimes nothing passes me. As a bus passenger, there's no congestion as my buses approach and cross the bridge, then turn into St Leonard's Place. As a driver, during restricted hours I can come in along Bootham and turn left into Gillygate without extreme congestion. I haven't noticed congestion being any worse in Leeman Road, Foss Island or any of the other places complained of, some of which have always been diabolical.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.[/p][/quote]Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.[/p][/quote]Easy - as a pedestrian, the area is pleasanter to walk in and easier to cross the road (a letter here from a library user recently made the same point). As a cyclist I have fewer vehicles squeezing me against the kerb, as they usually don't have to avoid approaching vehicles - in fact sometimes nothing passes me. As a bus passenger, there's no congestion as my buses approach and cross the bridge, then turn into St Leonard's Place. As a driver, during restricted hours I can come in along Bootham and turn left into Gillygate without extreme congestion. I haven't noticed congestion being any worse in Leeman Road, Foss Island or any of the other places complained of, some of which have always been diabolical. old_geezer
  • Score: 68

4:58pm Thu 27 Feb 14

jimmy120883 says...

So what are the Tories saying here?
Coun Gillies said he accepted “we cannot stand still” and “perhaps the eventual solution will be more drastic than closing just one bridge”.
If the trial becomes permanent they wont reverse it but may even be more drastic?
So what are the Tories saying here? Coun Gillies said he accepted “we cannot stand still” and “perhaps the eventual solution will be more drastic than closing just one bridge”. If the trial becomes permanent they wont reverse it but may even be more drastic? jimmy120883
  • Score: 58

5:00pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AnotherPointofView says...

old_geezer wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
old_geezer wrote:
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.
Easy - as a pedestrian, the area is pleasanter to walk in and easier to cross the road (a letter here from a library user recently made the same point). As a cyclist I have fewer vehicles squeezing me against the kerb, as they usually don't have to avoid approaching vehicles - in fact sometimes nothing passes me. As a bus passenger, there's no congestion as my buses approach and cross the bridge, then turn into St Leonard's Place. As a driver, during restricted hours I can come in along Bootham and turn left into Gillygate without extreme congestion. I haven't noticed congestion being any worse in Leeman Road, Foss Island or any of the other places complained of, some of which have always been diabolical.
As a delivery driver who spends most of the day driving around York, I have to disagree with you. The only road where traffic is reduced is Bootham (inbound) and that's only for part of the day. Gillygate is usually full, as is Lord Mayors Walk and Foss Islands is also very busy.

As for Leeman Road the traffic is far worse, particularly on an afternoon. The traffic is horrendous. I feel very sorry for the residents who have to put up with the increase in noise and air pollution.

A big thumbs up to The Press for printing this article. Well done!
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.[/p][/quote]Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.[/p][/quote]Easy - as a pedestrian, the area is pleasanter to walk in and easier to cross the road (a letter here from a library user recently made the same point). As a cyclist I have fewer vehicles squeezing me against the kerb, as they usually don't have to avoid approaching vehicles - in fact sometimes nothing passes me. As a bus passenger, there's no congestion as my buses approach and cross the bridge, then turn into St Leonard's Place. As a driver, during restricted hours I can come in along Bootham and turn left into Gillygate without extreme congestion. I haven't noticed congestion being any worse in Leeman Road, Foss Island or any of the other places complained of, some of which have always been diabolical.[/p][/quote]As a delivery driver who spends most of the day driving around York, I have to disagree with you. The only road where traffic is reduced is Bootham (inbound) and that's only for part of the day. Gillygate is usually full, as is Lord Mayors Walk and Foss Islands is also very busy. As for Leeman Road the traffic is far worse, particularly on an afternoon. The traffic is horrendous. I feel very sorry for the residents who have to put up with the increase in noise and air pollution. A big thumbs up to The Press for printing this article. Well done! AnotherPointofView
  • Score: 112

5:09pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Happytoliveinyork says...

The Press gets lots of stick, but in his case a big well done!!
The Press gets lots of stick, but in his case a big well done!! Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: 86

5:23pm Thu 27 Feb 14

JasBro says...

Lunatic wrote:
"feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York,"

Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions.

Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.
What you believe can be based on a wealth of information and experience, or on none. It's your personal choice. That's democracy.

There is plenty of information out there.

http://www.york.gov.
uk/citycentreimprove
ments

http://www.yorkpress
.co.uk/search/?searc
h=Lendal+Bridge
[quote][p][bold]Lunatic[/bold] wrote: "feedback from a survey on the trial, collated in December and showing 75 per cent believed it had “a negative or very negative impact” on York," Believed? We're basing things on what people believe, rather than what is actually true? It disappoints me to see both sides of the argument relying largely on anecdotes and emotional whim in reaching their conclusions. Some raw figures would be nice in helping those of us who care to actually think for ourselves reach a conclusion.[/p][/quote]What you believe can be based on a wealth of information and experience, or on none. It's your personal choice. That's democracy. There is plenty of information out there. http://www.york.gov. uk/citycentreimprove ments http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/search/?searc h=Lendal+Bridge JasBro
  • Score: -5

5:26pm Thu 27 Feb 14

andybrit1 says...

So the trial is finished. 75 percent of people questioned, don't like it. I've heard several whimpish debates on the radio, from the Labour councillors, stating, there are no real delays around York. So rather than the usual; rant at this time, I would like to challenge any one of them, so borrow a car ( being as they no doubt only have cycles), and try to negotiate a route from Huntington, to Acomb, and do it in the 20 minutes of so, it should take. And do it around 3.15pm. I have, today, tried a such route, and ended up sitting in my car, along Shipton Road, for 40 minutes, before, I did a 3 point turn, and headed home. I have had to let 2 customers down, and it will probably cost me work/ money. If the trial is finished, then the bridge should open as normal, and proper traffic surveys should be carried out. After all, if this council is right, and nothing is different, and if the result of the trial, mean that the bridge closure has done more good than harm, then return it to it's closed state. it's wrong to keep it closed, just because this is what YCC want.
So the trial is finished. 75 percent of people questioned, don't like it. I've heard several whimpish debates on the radio, from the Labour councillors, stating, there are no real delays around York. So rather than the usual; rant at this time, I would like to challenge any one of them, so borrow a car ( being as they no doubt only have cycles), and try to negotiate a route from Huntington, to Acomb, and do it in the 20 minutes of so, it should take. And do it around 3.15pm. I have, today, tried a such route, and ended up sitting in my car, along Shipton Road, for 40 minutes, before, I did a 3 point turn, and headed home. I have had to let 2 customers down, and it will probably cost me work/ money. If the trial is finished, then the bridge should open as normal, and proper traffic surveys should be carried out. After all, if this council is right, and nothing is different, and if the result of the trial, mean that the bridge closure has done more good than harm, then return it to it's closed state. it's wrong to keep it closed, just because this is what YCC want. andybrit1
  • Score: 89

5:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

andybrit1 says...

last time I mentioned this, it was deleted. Watch out for the real reason, YCC want to pave Exhibition Square, and the area around the current York council buildings in St Leonards. Secret memo leaked, from YCC stating the sale of St Leonards to a hotel group. It will only go ahead if the area around it is pedestrianised
last time I mentioned this, it was deleted. Watch out for the real reason, YCC want to pave Exhibition Square, and the area around the current York council buildings in St Leonards. Secret memo leaked, from YCC stating the sale of St Leonards to a hotel group. It will only go ahead if the area around it is pedestrianised andybrit1
  • Score: 53

5:48pm Thu 27 Feb 14

AdrianlovesYorkMinster says...

Oaklands Resident wrote:
Much as expected. The "trial" was introduced before proper signage and advertising had been agreed. Now the Council must publish immediately the results of its survey of public opinion which it concluded yesterday. They've used "survey monkey" which provides real time results. No excuse for delay.
Although I don't live in York I'm a regular visitor to the city and I don't think the daytime closure of Lendal Bridge has measurably improved the environment in between the Railway Station and the Minster. It has needlessly angered and inconvenienced both locals and visitors alike. It is time for this this unhappy experiemrent to be abandoned for good.
[quote][p][bold]Oaklands Resident[/bold] wrote: Much as expected. The "trial" was introduced before proper signage and advertising had been agreed. Now the Council must publish immediately the results of its survey of public opinion which it concluded yesterday. They've used "survey monkey" which provides real time results. No excuse for delay.[/p][/quote]Although I don't live in York I'm a regular visitor to the city and I don't think the daytime closure of Lendal Bridge has measurably improved the environment in between the Railway Station and the Minster. It has needlessly angered and inconvenienced both locals and visitors alike. It is time for this this unhappy experiemrent to be abandoned for good. AdrianlovesYorkMinster
  • Score: 104

5:49pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Ichabod76 says...

Score adjuster monkey has been let out early tonight, lots of work to do.
You could vote up all the comments that support the council if you can find any !
Score adjuster monkey has been let out early tonight, lots of work to do. You could vote up all the comments that support the council if you can find any ! Ichabod76
  • Score: 71

5:50pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

If only all this would have any real effect on what is going to happen. You'd think so but I can't see it, not going on recent history.

I agree with all those looking for a similar expose regarding 20's Plenty.

"The truth will out"
If only all this would have any real effect on what is going to happen. You'd think so but I can't see it, not going on recent history. I agree with all those looking for a similar expose regarding 20's Plenty. "The truth will out" Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 194

6:01pm Thu 27 Feb 14

meme says...

This is really scary stuff....... they wanted to stifle debate in case it got picked up later. They hid facts etc.....! whether you voted labour or not its clear this lot are completely out of control and don't deserve to hold public office whatever political colour they are.
They are elected officials whose role is to serve York and act truthfully and honestly. The same issues arose over Monks Cross where planning was forced through by Mr Woolley who then left
The affordable housing debate suffers the same issues of fact hiding and political agendas
it all stinks and is destroying our trust in any politicians
This is really scary stuff....... they wanted to stifle debate in case it got picked up later. They hid facts etc.....! whether you voted labour or not its clear this lot are completely out of control and don't deserve to hold public office whatever political colour they are. They are elected officials whose role is to serve York and act truthfully and honestly. The same issues arose over Monks Cross where planning was forced through by Mr Woolley who then left The affordable housing debate suffers the same issues of fact hiding and political agendas it all stinks and is destroying our trust in any politicians meme
  • Score: 74

6:21pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Silver says...

meme wrote:
This is really scary stuff....... they wanted to stifle debate in case it got picked up later. They hid facts etc.....! whether you voted labour or not its clear this lot are completely out of control and don't deserve to hold public office whatever political colour they are.
They are elected officials whose role is to serve York and act truthfully and honestly. The same issues arose over Monks Cross where planning was forced through by Mr Woolley who then left
The affordable housing debate suffers the same issues of fact hiding and political agendas
it all stinks and is destroying our trust in any politicians
Well said and well done Press, I bet there's more dirt to find though
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: This is really scary stuff....... they wanted to stifle debate in case it got picked up later. They hid facts etc.....! whether you voted labour or not its clear this lot are completely out of control and don't deserve to hold public office whatever political colour they are. They are elected officials whose role is to serve York and act truthfully and honestly. The same issues arose over Monks Cross where planning was forced through by Mr Woolley who then left The affordable housing debate suffers the same issues of fact hiding and political agendas it all stinks and is destroying our trust in any politicians[/p][/quote]Well said and well done Press, I bet there's more dirt to find though Silver
  • Score: 108

6:33pm Thu 27 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

HoofHearteds wrote: (yesterday)

There are four kinds of lies...Lies - **** lies - statistics and statistics used to support a bigoted opinion.

How right you were!
HoofHearteds wrote: (yesterday) There are four kinds of lies...Lies - **** lies - statistics and statistics used to support a bigoted opinion. How right you were! strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 191

6:34pm Thu 27 Feb 14

joelwithatleast6characters says...

Secret emails?

Press: Can we see your emails?
Council: ...yes...

Top work The Press!
Secret emails? Press: Can we see your emails? Council: ...yes... Top work The Press! joelwithatleast6characters
  • Score: 77

6:37pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

meme wrote:
This is really scary stuff....... they wanted to stifle debate in case it got picked up later. They hid facts etc.....! whether you voted labour or not its clear this lot are completely out of control and don't deserve to hold public office whatever political colour they are. They are elected officials whose role is to serve York and act truthfully and honestly. The same issues arose over Monks Cross where planning was forced through by Mr Woolley who then left The affordable housing debate suffers the same issues of fact hiding and political agendas it all stinks and is destroying our trust in any politicians
This is nothing new. Its been going on for a long time as you well know, but, this time they have been well and truly caught out.

You're right, the council is completely out of control - it's endemic throughout; with both systems and individuals; councillors and officers.

It is time for those responsible to be held to account, and made an example of. This is the only way to restore order and restore the confidence and faith of residents.
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: This is really scary stuff....... they wanted to stifle debate in case it got picked up later. They hid facts etc.....! whether you voted labour or not its clear this lot are completely out of control and don't deserve to hold public office whatever political colour they are. They are elected officials whose role is to serve York and act truthfully and honestly. The same issues arose over Monks Cross where planning was forced through by Mr Woolley who then left The affordable housing debate suffers the same issues of fact hiding and political agendas it all stinks and is destroying our trust in any politicians[/p][/quote]This is nothing new. Its been going on for a long time as you well know, but, this time they have been well and truly caught out. You're right, the council is completely out of control - it's endemic throughout; with both systems and individuals; councillors and officers. It is time for those responsible to be held to account, and made an example of. This is the only way to restore order and restore the confidence and faith of residents. Badgers Drift
  • Score: 79

6:39pm Thu 27 Feb 14

bolero says...

bolero wrote:
Debate over. Thanks press. You can't discuss/debate with a bunch of lying, cheating, manipulative, deceptive, devious individuals like this lot. Read it quickly before it's deleted.
-6 eh? Thank you cheats.
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: Debate over. Thanks press. You can't discuss/debate with a bunch of lying, cheating, manipulative, deceptive, devious individuals like this lot. Read it quickly before it's deleted.[/p][/quote]-6 eh? Thank you cheats. bolero
  • Score: 90

6:41pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

I see the score hacker has got hiome from work and started meddling - the pathetic moron !
I see the score hacker has got hiome from work and started meddling - the pathetic moron ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 148

6:41pm Thu 27 Feb 14

LadyYork1979 says...

It is an utter joke! We operate coaches in the area...and signs clearly state access to local hotels and theatres. We have been sent fines for two coaches going over the bridge for this very reason!!! They can see me in court before I pay them a sodding penny. I cannot understand what their mentality was in closing this bridge in the first place??

Just my opinion
It is an utter joke! We operate coaches in the area...and signs clearly state access to local hotels and theatres. We have been sent fines for two coaches going over the bridge for this very reason!!! They can see me in court before I pay them a sodding penny. I cannot understand what their mentality was in closing this bridge in the first place?? Just my opinion LadyYork1979
  • Score: 129

6:45pm Thu 27 Feb 14

livewithit says...

Just seen Merrett on look north - what a joke he is.
By the way Merrett + cronies, just taken over 1 1/2 hours to get round 1237
Just seen Merrett on look north - what a joke he is. By the way Merrett + cronies, just taken over 1 1/2 hours to get round 1237 livewithit
  • Score: 165

6:47pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

Merrett has just been on Look North and was put through the ringer by Harry Gration.

Merrett said that on average the journey time from Micklegate Bar to the Hospital during the closure time for Lendal Bridge, added four and a half minutes !

Harry Gration's response was "Rubbish" !!! 'What time did you measure that at, midnight ?'

Well said, Harry Gration !!!

If the interview was supposed to mend the Council's position, it failed dismally. They are an absolute laughing stock !
Merrett has just been on Look North and was put through the ringer by Harry Gration. Merrett said that on average the journey time from Micklegate Bar to the Hospital during the closure time for Lendal Bridge, added four and a half minutes ! Harry Gration's response was "Rubbish" !!! 'What time did you measure that at, midnight ?' Well said, Harry Gration !!! If the interview was supposed to mend the Council's position, it failed dismally. They are an absolute laughing stock ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 75

6:49pm Thu 27 Feb 14

yorkandproud says...

Dave Merrett just done an interview with Harry Gration on Look North. Dave stuttering and stammering throughout, ending it , talking about spending the money collected in fines, on shuttle buses across the city. That's a new one Dave. Any more rabbits you can pull out of your hat. Total joke. Resign resign resign, York cabinet. You are making a fool of yourselves , and this beautiful city of York.
Dave Merrett just done an interview with Harry Gration on Look North. Dave stuttering and stammering throughout, ending it , talking about spending the money collected in fines, on shuttle buses across the city. That's a new one Dave. Any more rabbits you can pull out of your hat. Total joke. Resign resign resign, York cabinet. You are making a fool of yourselves , and this beautiful city of York. yorkandproud
  • Score: 220

7:06pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Osbaldwick Lad says...

The next General Election will be held on the same day as the next local elections. It would seem that the local Labour city councillors are losing the support of the electorate and by association could take down with them the sitting Member of Parliament.
The next General Election will be held on the same day as the next local elections. It would seem that the local Labour city councillors are losing the support of the electorate and by association could take down with them the sitting Member of Parliament. Osbaldwick Lad
  • Score: 121

7:06pm Thu 27 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

You would think that after this kind of misleading of the public there would be something which could and should be done to stop these people. They clearly should not be in public office.
You would think that after this kind of misleading of the public there would be something which could and should be done to stop these people. They clearly should not be in public office. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 115

7:09pm Thu 27 Feb 14

24.2.1969bestcitygoalever... says...

York needs a comprehensive 'access plan'. Not just dabbling with one bridge. Just go and have a look at it. It's a beautiful bridge. It's amazing any vehicular traffic of any sort still goes over it...... and the other bridges and quite a few other roads and streets too. It's like being allowed to drive through a museum. You wouldn't dream of doing that. It amazes me that these matters are just starting to be addressed now.....

You need to do something quite innovative.
York needs a comprehensive 'access plan'. Not just dabbling with one bridge. Just go and have a look at it. It's a beautiful bridge. It's amazing any vehicular traffic of any sort still goes over it...... and the other bridges and quite a few other roads and streets too. It's like being allowed to drive through a museum. You wouldn't dream of doing that. It amazes me that these matters are just starting to be addressed now..... You need to do something quite innovative. 24.2.1969bestcitygoalever...
  • Score: 82

7:11pm Thu 27 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I see the score adjuster is active right now. Must have been given the day to battle this one. Careful you don't get tenosynovitis.
I see the score adjuster is active right now. Must have been given the day to battle this one. Careful you don't get tenosynovitis. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 185

7:13pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Sign 'O' The Times says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
I see the score hacker has got hiome from work and started meddling - the pathetic moron !
I'm not sure it is the same one as the scores haven't been adjusted by the usual ridiculous amount. I think it is more likely to be the supporters of the closure that are furious that they have been made to look ridiculous now the lies and deceit have been exposed.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: I see the score hacker has got hiome from work and started meddling - the pathetic moron ![/p][/quote]I'm not sure it is the same one as the scores haven't been adjusted by the usual ridiculous amount. I think it is more likely to be the supporters of the closure that are furious that they have been made to look ridiculous now the lies and deceit have been exposed. Sign 'O' The Times
  • Score: 194

7:26pm Thu 27 Feb 14

grammy says...

All this hoo ha about Lendlal Bridge no one seems to have mentioned the change to Coppergate, this seems to have sneaked in under the radar. of the Lendal Bridge closure debarcle. Having been out of town for some time and not being sure of the Lendal closure times, as it was after 6pm I used Coppergate only to receive a fine for using "bus lane" BEFORE 7 pm. I paid the reduced fine of £30, appealed, was turned down but told I could appeal again but if I do I would have to pay the full fine of £60. Money grabbing or what, this Council is all out to make money out of its citizens, including law abiding pensioners who due to circumstances did not know of the change to the already restricted time and made an honest mistake, how many others have been caught I wonder and how much revenue have they made out of that !!!!!!
All this hoo ha about Lendlal Bridge no one seems to have mentioned the change to Coppergate, this seems to have sneaked in under the radar. of the Lendal Bridge closure debarcle. Having been out of town for some time and not being sure of the Lendal closure times, as it was after 6pm I used Coppergate only to receive a fine for using "bus lane" BEFORE 7 pm. I paid the reduced fine of £30, appealed, was turned down but told I could appeal again but if I do I would have to pay the full fine of £60. Money grabbing or what, this Council is all out to make money out of its citizens, including law abiding pensioners who due to circumstances did not know of the change to the already restricted time and made an honest mistake, how many others have been caught I wonder and how much revenue have they made out of that !!!!!! grammy
  • Score: 103

7:27pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Batman Begins says...

bolero wrote:
bolero wrote:
Debate over. Thanks press. You can't discuss/debate with a bunch of lying, cheating, manipulative, deceptive, devious individuals like this lot. Read it quickly before it's deleted.
-6 eh? Thank you cheats.
-53 now Bolero, you must be getting close to the truth!
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: Debate over. Thanks press. You can't discuss/debate with a bunch of lying, cheating, manipulative, deceptive, devious individuals like this lot. Read it quickly before it's deleted.[/p][/quote]-6 eh? Thank you cheats.[/p][/quote]-53 now Bolero, you must be getting close to the truth! Batman Begins
  • Score: 72

7:35pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Batman Begins says...

grammy wrote:
All this hoo ha about Lendlal Bridge no one seems to have mentioned the change to Coppergate, this seems to have sneaked in under the radar. of the Lendal Bridge closure debarcle. Having been out of town for some time and not being sure of the Lendal closure times, as it was after 6pm I used Coppergate only to receive a fine for using "bus lane" BEFORE 7 pm. I paid the reduced fine of £30, appealed, was turned down but told I could appeal again but if I do I would have to pay the full fine of £60. Money grabbing or what, this Council is all out to make money out of its citizens, including law abiding pensioners who due to circumstances did not know of the change to the already restricted time and made an honest mistake, how many others have been caught I wonder and how much revenue have they made out of that !!!!!!
Maybe the whole Lendal Bridge closure thing is just some enormous plot to hide lots of other things, like the Coppergate closure hours, expensive new council offices, King's Square debacle, lack of affordable housing in the City! Or am I giving them too much credit for their planning abilities?
[quote][p][bold]grammy[/bold] wrote: All this hoo ha about Lendlal Bridge no one seems to have mentioned the change to Coppergate, this seems to have sneaked in under the radar. of the Lendal Bridge closure debarcle. Having been out of town for some time and not being sure of the Lendal closure times, as it was after 6pm I used Coppergate only to receive a fine for using "bus lane" BEFORE 7 pm. I paid the reduced fine of £30, appealed, was turned down but told I could appeal again but if I do I would have to pay the full fine of £60. Money grabbing or what, this Council is all out to make money out of its citizens, including law abiding pensioners who due to circumstances did not know of the change to the already restricted time and made an honest mistake, how many others have been caught I wonder and how much revenue have they made out of that !!!!!![/p][/quote]Maybe the whole Lendal Bridge closure thing is just some enormous plot to hide lots of other things, like the Coppergate closure hours, expensive new council offices, King's Square debacle, lack of affordable housing in the City! Or am I giving them too much credit for their planning abilities? Batman Begins
  • Score: 122

7:37pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Sign 'O' The Times says...

Sign 'O' The Times wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
I see the score hacker has got hiome from work and started meddling - the pathetic moron !
I'm not sure it is the same one as the scores haven't been adjusted by the usual ridiculous amount. I think it is more likely to be the supporters of the closure that are furious that they have been made to look ridiculous now the lies and deceit have been exposed.
Perhaps I spoke too soon. Within the space of five minutes the negative scores on some comments have more than doubled. I don't know about anyone else, but I think those responsible should be really worried about the state of their mental health. These are not the actions of a well-balanced, rational person.
[quote][p][bold]Sign 'O' The Times[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: I see the score hacker has got hiome from work and started meddling - the pathetic moron ![/p][/quote]I'm not sure it is the same one as the scores haven't been adjusted by the usual ridiculous amount. I think it is more likely to be the supporters of the closure that are furious that they have been made to look ridiculous now the lies and deceit have been exposed.[/p][/quote]Perhaps I spoke too soon. Within the space of five minutes the negative scores on some comments have more than doubled. I don't know about anyone else, but I think those responsible should be really worried about the state of their mental health. These are not the actions of a well-balanced, rational person. Sign 'O' The Times
  • Score: 168

7:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

SilentMajor I.T. says...

joelwithatleast6char
acters
wrote:
Secret emails?

Press: Can we see your emails?
Council: ...yes...

Top work The Press!
Amongst all th angry keyboard bashers, you might just have something there Joel.

Kev D
[quote][p][bold]joelwithatleast6char acters[/bold] wrote: Secret emails? Press: Can we see your emails? Council: ...yes... Top work The Press![/p][/quote]Amongst all th angry keyboard bashers, you might just have something there Joel. Kev D SilentMajor I.T.
  • Score: 418

7:41pm Thu 27 Feb 14

bolero says...

_131 now. Go on keep it up. This is becoming very interesting. At least it's not a secret.
_131 now. Go on keep it up. This is becoming very interesting. At least it's not a secret. bolero
  • Score: 333

7:48pm Thu 27 Feb 14

smokin750 says...

Time for resignations from these lying sods who cannot be trusted to run a two seater s**t house me thinks..
Time for resignations from these lying sods who cannot be trusted to run a two seater s**t house me thinks.. smokin750
  • Score: 151

7:52pm Thu 27 Feb 14

smokin750 says...

Dont take any notice on the scores they don't count towards anything, and as long as you keep referring to them the half wit that is adjusting them will carry on.
Dont take any notice on the scores they don't count towards anything, and as long as you keep referring to them the half wit that is adjusting them will carry on. smokin750
  • Score: 450

7:59pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Sign 'O' The Times says...

smokin750 wrote:
Dont take any notice on the scores they don't count towards anything, and as long as you keep referring to them the half wit that is adjusting them will carry on.
Those of us who regularly read and/or comment understand that. To do it once or twice, as a prank, would be understandable, but it has been happening for months now. Those responsible really do need treatment.
[quote][p][bold]smokin750[/bold] wrote: Dont take any notice on the scores they don't count towards anything, and as long as you keep referring to them the half wit that is adjusting them will carry on.[/p][/quote]Those of us who regularly read and/or comment understand that. To do it once or twice, as a prank, would be understandable, but it has been happening for months now. Those responsible really do need treatment. Sign 'O' The Times
  • Score: 281

8:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

harrisj says...

Can't we start a vote of no confidence with this lot.
Can't we start a vote of no confidence with this lot. harrisj
  • Score: 95

8:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

yorkandproud says...

Osbaldwick Lad wrote:
The next General Election will be held on the same day as the next local elections. It would seem that the local Labour city councillors are losing the support of the electorate and by association could take down with them the sitting Member of Parliament.
That's very interesting actually. I have always voted for Hugh Bayley, but next election I am ??? .
[quote][p][bold]Osbaldwick Lad[/bold] wrote: The next General Election will be held on the same day as the next local elections. It would seem that the local Labour city councillors are losing the support of the electorate and by association could take down with them the sitting Member of Parliament.[/p][/quote]That's very interesting actually. I have always voted for Hugh Bayley, but next election I am ??? . yorkandproud
  • Score: 255

8:17pm Thu 27 Feb 14

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

Watching Merrett the Ferret squirm in his seat while being grilled by Harry Gration was priceless.
Watching Merrett the Ferret squirm in his seat while being grilled by Harry Gration was priceless. NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: 590

8:17pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Steve, says...

ouseswimmer wrote:
So they know its a mess but want to continue? Why is the trial over but the bridge still closed? Is this legal?
Have emailed to check, legally their 6 months is up so I can't see what legally they can use to base a fine on, by their own publications the fine is 'over'; supported by info in the TRO's printed.
[quote][p][bold]ouseswimmer[/bold] wrote: So they know its a mess but want to continue? Why is the trial over but the bridge still closed? Is this legal?[/p][/quote]Have emailed to check, legally their 6 months is up so I can't see what legally they can use to base a fine on, by their own publications the fine is 'over'; supported by info in the TRO's printed. Steve,
  • Score: 290

8:20pm Thu 27 Feb 14

YorkSeptic says...

It's quite funny to watch the vote manipulator change tactics - he's figured out that instantly blasting everyone's score to -100 is less believable, so now he's (and it is *definitely* a he) figured out that introducing a 30 second delay between downvotes makes it seem more 'organic' and less likely that the sysadmins will notice.

I think the person doing this is not particularly bright, it's someone who's a geek, but probably doesn't work in an actual IT role - they'd probably have used setTimeout() earlier. So because they have a modicum of internet literacy I am going to *guess* that they're under the age of 40. They're quite persistent, target only stories / comments which discuss labour policies - we can be relatively certain they're an active member of the labour party in York. The tactic itself is one of desparation, so this is someone who is not confident in their own position, or is not confident about Labour's current position, and they care enough about it to break the law. They aim to discredit the voting system because it exposes how deeply unpopular the council's policies are. How many more bits of data do we need to de-anonymize this person in a city of only 200,000 people?

How many geeky-but-not-profes
sionally-geeky men under 40,, are active in York labour party? Of those, who has shown themselves to be zealous about Labour or power, but not necessarily zealous about "democracy" and "free speech". Of those, who cares enough to actually do this?

I don't think that's a long list of people. And if the press cared at all, they could find the person who is doing this within a few hours at most. Maybe that might be an interesting story?
It's quite funny to watch the vote manipulator change tactics - he's figured out that instantly blasting everyone's score to -100 is less believable, so now he's (and it is *definitely* a he) figured out that introducing a 30 second delay between downvotes makes it seem more 'organic' and less likely that the sysadmins will notice. I think the person doing this is not particularly bright, it's someone who's a geek, but probably doesn't work in an actual IT role - they'd probably have used setTimeout() earlier. So because they have a modicum of internet literacy I am going to *guess* that they're under the age of 40. They're quite persistent, target only stories / comments which discuss labour policies - we can be relatively certain they're an active member of the labour party in York. The tactic itself is one of desparation, so this is someone who is not confident in their own position, or is not confident about Labour's current position, and they care enough about it to break the law. They aim to discredit the voting system because it exposes how deeply unpopular the council's policies are. How many more bits of data do we need to de-anonymize this person in a city of only 200,000 people? How many geeky-but-not-profes sionally-geeky men under 40,, are active in York labour party? Of those, who has shown themselves to be zealous about Labour or power, but not necessarily zealous about "democracy" and "free speech". Of those, who cares enough to actually do this? I don't think that's a long list of people. And if the press cared at all, they could find the person who is doing this within a few hours at most. Maybe that might be an interesting story? YorkSeptic
  • Score: 170

8:27pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Pinza-C55 says...

I would love to see what James Alexander has scribbled on his envelope tonight.
Sorry, "doodled".
I would love to see what James Alexander has scribbled on his envelope tonight. Sorry, "doodled". Pinza-C55
  • Score: 202

8:30pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Pinza-C55 says...

YorkSeptic wrote:
It's quite funny to watch the vote manipulator change tactics - he's figured out that instantly blasting everyone's score to -100 is less believable, so now he's (and it is *definitely* a he) figured out that introducing a 30 second delay between downvotes makes it seem more 'organic' and less likely that the sysadmins will notice.

I think the person doing this is not particularly bright, it's someone who's a geek, but probably doesn't work in an actual IT role - they'd probably have used setTimeout() earlier. So because they have a modicum of internet literacy I am going to *guess* that they're under the age of 40. They're quite persistent, target only stories / comments which discuss labour policies - we can be relatively certain they're an active member of the labour party in York. The tactic itself is one of desparation, so this is someone who is not confident in their own position, or is not confident about Labour's current position, and they care enough about it to break the law. They aim to discredit the voting system because it exposes how deeply unpopular the council's policies are. How many more bits of data do we need to de-anonymize this person in a city of only 200,000 people?

How many geeky-but-not-profes

sionally-geeky men under 40,, are active in York labour party? Of those, who has shown themselves to be zealous about Labour or power, but not necessarily zealous about "democracy" and "free speech". Of those, who cares enough to actually do this?

I don't think that's a long list of people. And if the press cared at all, they could find the person who is doing this within a few hours at most. Maybe that might be an interesting story?
Maybe we need a vote of no confidence in the York Press?
[quote][p][bold]YorkSeptic[/bold] wrote: It's quite funny to watch the vote manipulator change tactics - he's figured out that instantly blasting everyone's score to -100 is less believable, so now he's (and it is *definitely* a he) figured out that introducing a 30 second delay between downvotes makes it seem more 'organic' and less likely that the sysadmins will notice. I think the person doing this is not particularly bright, it's someone who's a geek, but probably doesn't work in an actual IT role - they'd probably have used setTimeout() earlier. So because they have a modicum of internet literacy I am going to *guess* that they're under the age of 40. They're quite persistent, target only stories / comments which discuss labour policies - we can be relatively certain they're an active member of the labour party in York. The tactic itself is one of desparation, so this is someone who is not confident in their own position, or is not confident about Labour's current position, and they care enough about it to break the law. They aim to discredit the voting system because it exposes how deeply unpopular the council's policies are. How many more bits of data do we need to de-anonymize this person in a city of only 200,000 people? How many geeky-but-not-profes sionally-geeky men under 40,, are active in York labour party? Of those, who has shown themselves to be zealous about Labour or power, but not necessarily zealous about "democracy" and "free speech". Of those, who cares enough to actually do this? I don't think that's a long list of people. And if the press cared at all, they could find the person who is doing this within a few hours at most. Maybe that might be an interesting story?[/p][/quote]Maybe we need a vote of no confidence in the York Press? Pinza-C55
  • Score: 594

8:59pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Sign 'O' The Times says...

YorkSeptic wrote:
It's quite funny to watch the vote manipulator change tactics - he's figured out that instantly blasting everyone's score to -100 is less believable, so now he's (and it is *definitely* a he) figured out that introducing a 30 second delay between downvotes makes it seem more 'organic' and less likely that the sysadmins will notice.

I think the person doing this is not particularly bright, it's someone who's a geek, but probably doesn't work in an actual IT role - they'd probably have used setTimeout() earlier. So because they have a modicum of internet literacy I am going to *guess* that they're under the age of 40. They're quite persistent, target only stories / comments which discuss labour policies - we can be relatively certain they're an active member of the labour party in York. The tactic itself is one of desparation, so this is someone who is not confident in their own position, or is not confident about Labour's current position, and they care enough about it to break the law. They aim to discredit the voting system because it exposes how deeply unpopular the council's policies are. How many more bits of data do we need to de-anonymize this person in a city of only 200,000 people?

How many geeky-but-not-profes

sionally-geeky men under 40,, are active in York labour party? Of those, who has shown themselves to be zealous about Labour or power, but not necessarily zealous about "democracy" and "free speech". Of those, who cares enough to actually do this?

I don't think that's a long list of people. And if the press cared at all, they could find the person who is doing this within a few hours at most. Maybe that might be an interesting story?
You are probably correct in all that you say. I would just like to add that they operate their keyboard with one hand whilst the other is....... well, perhaps there is no need to explain.
[quote][p][bold]YorkSeptic[/bold] wrote: It's quite funny to watch the vote manipulator change tactics - he's figured out that instantly blasting everyone's score to -100 is less believable, so now he's (and it is *definitely* a he) figured out that introducing a 30 second delay between downvotes makes it seem more 'organic' and less likely that the sysadmins will notice. I think the person doing this is not particularly bright, it's someone who's a geek, but probably doesn't work in an actual IT role - they'd probably have used setTimeout() earlier. So because they have a modicum of internet literacy I am going to *guess* that they're under the age of 40. They're quite persistent, target only stories / comments which discuss labour policies - we can be relatively certain they're an active member of the labour party in York. The tactic itself is one of desparation, so this is someone who is not confident in their own position, or is not confident about Labour's current position, and they care enough about it to break the law. They aim to discredit the voting system because it exposes how deeply unpopular the council's policies are. How many more bits of data do we need to de-anonymize this person in a city of only 200,000 people? How many geeky-but-not-profes sionally-geeky men under 40,, are active in York labour party? Of those, who has shown themselves to be zealous about Labour or power, but not necessarily zealous about "democracy" and "free speech". Of those, who cares enough to actually do this? I don't think that's a long list of people. And if the press cared at all, they could find the person who is doing this within a few hours at most. Maybe that might be an interesting story?[/p][/quote]You are probably correct in all that you say. I would just like to add that they operate their keyboard with one hand whilst the other is....... well, perhaps there is no need to explain. Sign 'O' The Times
  • Score: 211

9:01pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

old_geezer wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
old_geezer wrote:
As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.
Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.
Easy - as a pedestrian, the area is pleasanter to walk in and easier to cross the road (a letter here from a library user recently made the same point). As a cyclist I have fewer vehicles squeezing me against the kerb, as they usually don't have to avoid approaching vehicles - in fact sometimes nothing passes me. As a bus passenger, there's no congestion as my buses approach and cross the bridge, then turn into St Leonard's Place. As a driver, during restricted hours I can come in along Bootham and turn left into Gillygate without extreme congestion. I haven't noticed congestion being any worse in Leeman Road, Foss Island or any of the other places complained of, some of which have always been diabolical.
Fair enough. I have noticed it bad down near fisher gate. And to be fair that letter was from a 20 is plenty campaigner. I see the point with cycling but to be honest it's a road and cyclists have to put up with cars. The road is made for cars. And crossing the road is not a valid excuse for this mess. Guess you are part of the 15% that has benifited. I don't cross the bridge and walk to work but on weekends when I do need to get around it causes me mahem. Pets at home is like driving in Mumbai. And I just don't agree with the logistics to be honest. Fair play though.
[quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]old_geezer[/bold] wrote: As I've posted here before, the closure happens to suit me as a driver, pedestrian, bus passenger and cyclist. Yes there are losers, and it's right that they complain. Yes, the signage started out poor and the council's wooden response about "being compliant" was lamentable. No, the emails as quoted don't seem damning to me - after all, IT'S A TRIAL, evidence must be debated and opinions will vary. Let's see how 7am - 7pm works out.[/p][/quote]Can i ask how it has benefitted you on the above? Not to pick an argument or anything i'm just curious. Bus times have remained static in reports. Has the traffic been diverted from your usual routes due to the closure? Not sure what to say on the cycling and pedestrians ones as I don’t see how the closure could have impacted. i.e you could cycle and walk over it before and during so guess not much has changed. But the motor transportion improvements interest me.[/p][/quote]Easy - as a pedestrian, the area is pleasanter to walk in and easier to cross the road (a letter here from a library user recently made the same point). As a cyclist I have fewer vehicles squeezing me against the kerb, as they usually don't have to avoid approaching vehicles - in fact sometimes nothing passes me. As a bus passenger, there's no congestion as my buses approach and cross the bridge, then turn into St Leonard's Place. As a driver, during restricted hours I can come in along Bootham and turn left into Gillygate without extreme congestion. I haven't noticed congestion being any worse in Leeman Road, Foss Island or any of the other places complained of, some of which have always been diabolical.[/p][/quote]Fair enough. I have noticed it bad down near fisher gate. And to be fair that letter was from a 20 is plenty campaigner. I see the point with cycling but to be honest it's a road and cyclists have to put up with cars. The road is made for cars. And crossing the road is not a valid excuse for this mess. Guess you are part of the 15% that has benifited. I don't cross the bridge and walk to work but on weekends when I do need to get around it causes me mahem. Pets at home is like driving in Mumbai. And I just don't agree with the logistics to be honest. Fair play though. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 134

9:05pm Thu 27 Feb 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I notice Mr Merrett said on Look North that the council were aware of the congestion at the North end of Leeman Road. A bit more misleading in formation then came out of him by him saying this was due to more traffic turning right at the end. We can all see that the council have changed the phasing on theses lights to only allow a few cars out at a time and that is the main cause on most of York's congestion. I wonder if they have done this so that they can change it back at some later date and claim to be helping. This would again be misleading.

I don't suppose I need to bang on about things like this now as this storey has shown that this whole thing has just been one misleading thing after another.

I like to bet that First Bus are starting to feel a little uncomfortable coming out in the past few days with all of their support for this. Then again they will soon get over it as their profits start to increase. I wonder why they are so supportive??
I notice Mr Merrett said on Look North that the council were aware of the congestion at the North end of Leeman Road. A bit more misleading in formation then came out of him by him saying this was due to more traffic turning right at the end. We can all see that the council have changed the phasing on theses lights to only allow a few cars out at a time and that is the main cause on most of York's congestion. I wonder if they have done this so that they can change it back at some later date and claim to be helping. This would again be misleading. I don't suppose I need to bang on about things like this now as this storey has shown that this whole thing has just been one misleading thing after another. I like to bet that First Bus are starting to feel a little uncomfortable coming out in the past few days with all of their support for this. Then again they will soon get over it as their profits start to increase. I wonder why they are so supportive?? strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 166

9:06pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

AnotherPointofView wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Stealth-Taxi wrote:
My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.
mine too.. i did get a warning the other day for calling hoofherted a moron....
Your warning was justified. It was an insult to morons.
Hahaha that's actually made me chuckle. Especially after her "I shouldn't say this but the results of the air pollution are very positive" . Which to be fair it's the only thing from this campaigns that has remained level so guess it is positive for her.
[quote][p][bold]AnotherPointofView[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stealth-Taxi[/bold] wrote: My comments have been deleted ??? I was only asking why, late on a night, there seems to be a massive surge in negative/positive votes ?? It needs looking into.[/p][/quote]mine too.. i did get a warning the other day for calling hoofherted a moron....[/p][/quote]Your warning was justified. It was an insult to morons.[/p][/quote]Hahaha that's actually made me chuckle. Especially after her "I shouldn't say this but the results of the air pollution are very positive" . Which to be fair it's the only thing from this campaigns that has remained level so guess it is positive for her. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 1273

9:14pm Thu 27 Feb 14

sniper 9964 says...

Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London
Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London sniper 9964
  • Score: -558

9:54pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Silver says...

Got to love this quote Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”.
So guess who got tossed to the wolves. C'mon JA I'm a Labour voter and the day this gets leaked you through a colleague under the bus instead of yourself. I'm a massive Labour supporter but in the last election Gordon Brown was weak had he called an early election I'd have voted for him. I see the same weakness in yourself. Now I have the choice of the devil I know in the Lib Dems or an independant. So the fact he throws his colleague to attach it to him personally shows a weakness to me.
Got to love this quote Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”. So guess who got tossed to the wolves. C'mon JA I'm a Labour voter and the day this gets leaked you through a colleague under the bus instead of yourself. I'm a massive Labour supporter but in the last election Gordon Brown was weak had he called an early election I'd have voted for him. I see the same weakness in yourself. Now I have the choice of the devil I know in the Lib Dems or an independant. So the fact he throws his colleague to attach it to him personally shows a weakness to me. Silver
  • Score: 603

9:55pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Silver says...

Silver wrote:
Got to love this quote Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”.
So guess who got tossed to the wolves. C'mon JA I'm a Labour voter and the day this gets leaked you through a colleague under the bus instead of yourself. I'm a massive Labour supporter but in the last election Gordon Brown was weak had he called an early election I'd have voted for him. I see the same weakness in yourself. Now I have the choice of the devil I know in the Lib Dems or an independant. So the fact he throws his colleague to attach it to him personally shows a weakness to me.
Apologies for the mispelling it's throw under a bus not through
[quote][p][bold]Silver[/bold] wrote: Got to love this quote Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”. So guess who got tossed to the wolves. C'mon JA I'm a Labour voter and the day this gets leaked you through a colleague under the bus instead of yourself. I'm a massive Labour supporter but in the last election Gordon Brown was weak had he called an early election I'd have voted for him. I see the same weakness in yourself. Now I have the choice of the devil I know in the Lib Dems or an independant. So the fact he throws his colleague to attach it to him personally shows a weakness to me.[/p][/quote]Apologies for the mispelling it's throw under a bus not through Silver
  • Score: 1400

11:06pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Black Fox says...

Wow.

After sitting through a recent planning committee meeting I took a very quick dislike to Tracey Simpson-Laing, as did every non-Labour committee member.

An extremely unpleasant and inept individual who has today confirmed my suspicions that she is totally unsuitable for the role she currently holds.

She is a liar.
Wow. After sitting through a recent planning committee meeting I took a very quick dislike to Tracey Simpson-Laing, as did every non-Labour committee member. An extremely unpleasant and inept individual who has today confirmed my suspicions that she is totally unsuitable for the role she currently holds. She is a liar. Black Fox
  • Score: 1800

11:53pm Thu 27 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”.

A leader does not deserve the name unless he is willing occasionally to stand alone.
Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”. A leader does not deserve the name unless he is willing occasionally to stand alone. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 360

12:00am Fri 28 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

Well done press.

Well done Harry Gration, when tonight he chewed up Merrett and spat him out like a chewed up chewy thing.
Well done press. Well done Harry Gration, when tonight he chewed up Merrett and spat him out like a chewed up chewy thing. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 670

12:22am Fri 28 Feb 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

The truth of the matter is:

There is no truth.
The truth of the matter is: There is no truth. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -269

7:07am Fri 28 Feb 14

oi oi savaloy says...

what a corrupt bunch of people the york labour group are, i will be voting tory for the first time ever next elections!
what a corrupt bunch of people the york labour group are, i will be voting tory for the first time ever next elections! oi oi savaloy
  • Score: -64

7:25am Fri 28 Feb 14

pedalling paul says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option. pedalling paul
  • Score: 31

7:38am Fri 28 Feb 14

Stressed Out says...

Right York Press, next FOI is for North Yorkshire Police in ' can you please tell us how many Fixed Penalty Notices have been issued to motorists in York for exceeding the 20mph speed limits and using bus lanes'

I wonder what the answer would be?
Right York Press, next FOI is for North Yorkshire Police in ' can you please tell us how many Fixed Penalty Notices have been issued to motorists in York for exceeding the 20mph speed limits and using bus lanes' I wonder what the answer would be? Stressed Out
  • Score: 11

8:32am Fri 28 Feb 14

Dazmond says...

Yet more stories of individuals in a position of power who are totally bent - nothing new here.
Yet more stories of individuals in a position of power who are totally bent - nothing new here. Dazmond
  • Score: 12

8:35am Fri 28 Feb 14

meme says...

Good try TSL to spin this in a positive way...... It just shows how stupid you believe us all to be and what contempt you hold us all in. Do you have any shame or morals at all? When people behave like this and try to twist facts and stifle debate for their own ends they should NOT be in public office
Good try TSL to spin this in a positive way...... It just shows how stupid you believe us all to be and what contempt you hold us all in. Do you have any shame or morals at all? When people behave like this and try to twist facts and stifle debate for their own ends they should NOT be in public office meme
  • Score: 16

8:47am Fri 28 Feb 14

roskoboskovic says...

when merrett lied on look north last night about the time it takes to travel accross york even that toothless poodle gration got stuck into him and accused him of lying.merrett even lied about traffic congestion on leeman road and was frankly revealed as the ridiculous figure that he is.i can only assume that alexander,d agorne and merrett are coucillors only because noone decent wants the job.
when merrett lied on look north last night about the time it takes to travel accross york even that toothless poodle gration got stuck into him and accused him of lying.merrett even lied about traffic congestion on leeman road and was frankly revealed as the ridiculous figure that he is.i can only assume that alexander,d agorne and merrett are coucillors only because noone decent wants the job. roskoboskovic
  • Score: 13

8:57am Fri 28 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 19

10:10am Fri 28 Feb 14

oldgoat says...

sniper 9964 wrote:
Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London
No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and.......

Kidding.....

But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police....
We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.
[quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London[/p][/quote]No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling. oldgoat
  • Score: 1

10:19am Fri 28 Feb 14

pedalling paul says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.
I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking.............
....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey.
I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.[/p][/quote]I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking............. ....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey. I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything. pedalling paul
  • Score: -5

10:25am Fri 28 Feb 14

Batman Begins says...

I have read a lot lately, on this website and in other places, about how poor and dishonest the current Labour Administration is, as well as about how poor and dishonest the previous Liberal Democrat Administration was.

So what are the alternatives? It seems to me voting for the Conservatives would only bring in the same nasty policies that they have implemented at National Level, not sure I want that in York!

There’s always the UK independence Party, not sure York leaving the EU is such a good idea though!

So where does that leave us? Do we keep giving the political class in York power over us, or do we stand up and say no more! Do we take control over our own destiny and try to create something better?

Food for thought?
I have read a lot lately, on this website and in other places, about how poor and dishonest the current Labour Administration is, as well as about how poor and dishonest the previous Liberal Democrat Administration was. So what are the alternatives? It seems to me voting for the Conservatives would only bring in the same nasty policies that they have implemented at National Level, not sure I want that in York! There’s always the UK independence Party, not sure York leaving the EU is such a good idea though! So where does that leave us? Do we keep giving the political class in York power over us, or do we stand up and say no more! Do we take control over our own destiny and try to create something better? Food for thought? Batman Begins
  • Score: 5

10:30am Fri 28 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

oldgoat wrote:
sniper 9964 wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London
No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.
Thats an unfair one though as there is a left turn there and you're not going to wait in traffic to move further up and then turn left... my mum actually did get done once... i admit i do it all the time to turn left... why should i make the existing que longer. doesnt make sense.

But i dont get what the bus lane in holgate does? the traffic layout there now is terrible. Not sure how many busses but it must have cost a fair bit to re-model a road. its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.
[quote][p][bold]oldgoat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London[/p][/quote]No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.[/p][/quote]Thats an unfair one though as there is a left turn there and you're not going to wait in traffic to move further up and then turn left... my mum actually did get done once... i admit i do it all the time to turn left... why should i make the existing que longer. doesnt make sense. But i dont get what the bus lane in holgate does? the traffic layout there now is terrible. Not sure how many busses but it must have cost a fair bit to re-model a road. its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 8

10:41am Fri 28 Feb 14

JasBro says...

pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
I think many would agree that we need to reduce unnecessary car journeys. But this was a bad decision, poorly carried out.

We need more consultation and education, less dishonesty and lies.

The way this has been done could set progressive transport policies back by years. It's created a polarisation of opposing views when what we needed was to get together to discuss the options.

The people of York are not as stupid as this council seems to believe.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]I think many would agree that we need to reduce unnecessary car journeys. But this was a bad decision, poorly carried out. We need more consultation and education, less dishonesty and lies. The way this has been done could set progressive transport policies back by years. It's created a polarisation of opposing views when what we needed was to get together to discuss the options. The people of York are not as stupid as this council seems to believe. JasBro
  • Score: 330

10:43am Fri 28 Feb 14

YorkSeptic says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
oldgoat wrote:
sniper 9964 wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London
No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.
Thats an unfair one though as there is a left turn there and you're not going to wait in traffic to move further up and then turn left... my mum actually did get done once... i admit i do it all the time to turn left... why should i make the existing que longer. doesnt make sense.

But i dont get what the bus lane in holgate does? the traffic layout there now is terrible. Not sure how many busses but it must have cost a fair bit to re-model a road. its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.
oldgoat wrote: its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.


it didn't used to be, but now it's pretty bad.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldgoat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London[/p][/quote]No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.[/p][/quote]Thats an unfair one though as there is a left turn there and you're not going to wait in traffic to move further up and then turn left... my mum actually did get done once... i admit i do it all the time to turn left... why should i make the existing que longer. doesnt make sense. But i dont get what the bus lane in holgate does? the traffic layout there now is terrible. Not sure how many busses but it must have cost a fair bit to re-model a road. its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.[/p][/quote][quote][p][bold]oldgoat[/bold] wrote: its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.[/quote] it didn't used to be, but now it's pretty bad. YorkSeptic
  • Score: 4

10:50am Fri 28 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

YorkSeptic wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
oldgoat wrote:
sniper 9964 wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London
No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.
Thats an unfair one though as there is a left turn there and you're not going to wait in traffic to move further up and then turn left... my mum actually did get done once... i admit i do it all the time to turn left... why should i make the existing que longer. doesnt make sense. But i dont get what the bus lane in holgate does? the traffic layout there now is terrible. Not sure how many busses but it must have cost a fair bit to re-model a road. its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.
oldgoat wrote: its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.
it didn't used to be, but now it's pretty bad.
hahaha another well implemented waste of cash then... i use it to get to footy so the times vary but i just think its a stupid idea.... i mean how much time if any is being saved... and yet more lights making the place look horrible.
[quote][p][bold]YorkSeptic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldgoat[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sniper 9964[/bold] wrote: Come on Cyc close other two bridge's now. And use ANPR to enforce bus lanes like in London[/p][/quote]No no no! We need to close all the road bridges in the York area, build a couple of cycling bridges in the style of the Millenium bridge, and and....... Kidding..... But yes, bus lanes need to be enforced. If I had a camera on my bike and forwarded a piccy of every time a car misused the Mount Vale bus lane to the police.... We do however, need to remove a few of the useless cycle lanes. I do not buy the excuse that they encourage cycling.[/p][/quote]Thats an unfair one though as there is a left turn there and you're not going to wait in traffic to move further up and then turn left... my mum actually did get done once... i admit i do it all the time to turn left... why should i make the existing que longer. doesnt make sense. But i dont get what the bus lane in holgate does? the traffic layout there now is terrible. Not sure how many busses but it must have cost a fair bit to re-model a road. its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.[/p][/quote][quote][p][bold]oldgoat[/bold] wrote: its only about 300m long and traffic isnt bad in that area most of the time.[/quote] it didn't used to be, but now it's pretty bad.[/p][/quote]hahaha another well implemented waste of cash then... i use it to get to footy so the times vary but i just think its a stupid idea.... i mean how much time if any is being saved... and yet more lights making the place look horrible. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 6

10:59am Fri 28 Feb 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.
I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking.............

....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey.
I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.
But that's the point though then isn't it.
You know that we need a strategy so how could you support the Lendal closure which isn't a strategy in the slightest, it does nothing but hurt your case...

And seriously, how many times do you need telling that people use cars mostly because they need to. SOME THINGS CAN'T BE DONE ON A BIKE! I'd rarely highlight something on here, but I'm willing to try anything to make you understand I guess.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.[/p][/quote]I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking............. ....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey. I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.[/p][/quote]But that's the point though then isn't it. You know that we need a strategy so how could you support the Lendal closure which isn't a strategy in the slightest, it does nothing but hurt your case... And seriously, how many times do you need telling that people use cars mostly because they need to. SOME THINGS CAN'T BE DONE ON A BIKE! I'd rarely highlight something on here, but I'm willing to try anything to make you understand I guess. AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -169

11:00am Fri 28 Feb 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.
I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking............. ....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey. I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.
I know Paul but the statistics state that less cars are on the road then 5 years ago. To reduce car journeys there needs to be other options available and not just busses (they are the main reason for traffic mayhem) etc. I don’t know why car journeys will increase in the future? but i do know that if it continues to be this expensive to run a car the only thing that will happen is a reduction in car journeys. But one thing that would help is having clear journeys. I.e not shutting the bridge. I also think having john Lewis and m&s open up on the outskirts will divert a lot of city centre shopping along the ring road leaving the centre for tourists and those who live in the centre. But for me the entire of York is planed poorly with light sequences out of date, busses given priority with new lanes delaying traffic further, cycle paths blocking roads from being dual lanes. Id they want traffic to be reduced i can think of at least 5 schemes that would help.

As for the future of York transport what is there? without millions nothing can change. We are a small city with a population on the outskirts. Busses will be obsolete soon or need to be green. If i had it my way i'd open up old railway lines. If you live in poppleton its 5 minutes by train into the station. Imagine instead of a p&r at tesco it was a small tram or train service using existing lines? I’d park there for a traffic free journey into the centre with no stops. It would be the quickest method which is the only thing people are bothered about.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.[/p][/quote]I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking............. ....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey. I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.[/p][/quote]I know Paul but the statistics state that less cars are on the road then 5 years ago. To reduce car journeys there needs to be other options available and not just busses (they are the main reason for traffic mayhem) etc. I don’t know why car journeys will increase in the future? but i do know that if it continues to be this expensive to run a car the only thing that will happen is a reduction in car journeys. But one thing that would help is having clear journeys. I.e not shutting the bridge. I also think having john Lewis and m&s open up on the outskirts will divert a lot of city centre shopping along the ring road leaving the centre for tourists and those who live in the centre. But for me the entire of York is planed poorly with light sequences out of date, busses given priority with new lanes delaying traffic further, cycle paths blocking roads from being dual lanes. Id they want traffic to be reduced i can think of at least 5 schemes that would help. As for the future of York transport what is there? without millions nothing can change. We are a small city with a population on the outskirts. Busses will be obsolete soon or need to be green. If i had it my way i'd open up old railway lines. If you live in poppleton its 5 minutes by train into the station. Imagine instead of a p&r at tesco it was a small tram or train service using existing lines? I’d park there for a traffic free journey into the centre with no stops. It would be the quickest method which is the only thing people are bothered about. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: 10

11:44am Fri 28 Feb 14

WhoKnowsWhat?? says...

There are posters in Clifton advertising a meeting TODAY at 4pm at St.Joseph's Church on the Kingsway north roundabout to discuss the increase in traffic flow in Clifton and problems in the area with parking and traffic. Apparently the residents association has gotten involved and they ve got all sorts of representatives going and Tony Clark from lendal bridge experiment going to. on their facebook page Clifton residents.
There are posters in Clifton advertising a meeting TODAY at 4pm at St.Joseph's Church on the Kingsway north roundabout to discuss the increase in traffic flow in Clifton and problems in the area with parking and traffic. Apparently the residents association has gotten involved and they ve got all sorts of representatives going and Tony Clark from lendal bridge experiment going to. on their facebook page Clifton residents. WhoKnowsWhat??
  • Score: 4

1:10pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Teabag1 says...

The money should be refunded to all, same goes for coppergate fines until its sorted.
The money should be refunded to all, same goes for coppergate fines until its sorted. Teabag1
  • Score: 5

1:27pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Cheeky face says...

Coppergate fines inside the increased restricted times should have been warning letters.

Three sets of restricted times in York; what a joke.

The penalty charge adjudicator next needs to look at the Lendal Bridge restrtiction
fiasco. The portable variable message sign illumination board adjacent to Leeman's statue is misleading and grotesque.
Bus lane markings are still incomplete.
I still await a response to my prolonged arguments with the council; one if which started in 2011!
Coppergate fines inside the increased restricted times should have been warning letters. Three sets of restricted times in York; what a joke. The penalty charge adjudicator next needs to look at the Lendal Bridge restrtiction fiasco. The portable variable message sign illumination board adjacent to Leeman's statue is misleading and grotesque. Bus lane markings are still incomplete. I still await a response to my prolonged arguments with the council; one if which started in 2011! Cheeky face
  • Score: 6

1:31pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Cheeky face says...

CLIFTON MEETING.

Is this the same Tony Clarke who has not properly replied to my letter of 10.12.2013 despite 4 reminders; and a chase up via James Alexander which I started on 11.2.2014!
CLIFTON MEETING. Is this the same Tony Clarke who has not properly replied to my letter of 10.12.2013 despite 4 reminders; and a chase up via James Alexander which I started on 11.2.2014! Cheeky face
  • Score: 4

1:48pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

Batman Begins wrote:
I have read a lot lately, on this website and in other places, about how poor and dishonest the current Labour Administration is, as well as about how poor and dishonest the previous Liberal Democrat Administration was. So what are the alternatives? It seems to me voting for the Conservatives would only bring in the same nasty policies that they have implemented at National Level, not sure I want that in York! There’s always the UK independence Party, not sure York leaving the EU is such a good idea though! So where does that leave us? Do we keep giving the political class in York power over us, or do we stand up and say no more! Do we take control over our own destiny and try to create something better? Food for thought?
We need a few more independents like Mark Warters, who is not afraid to speak out against corruption, dishonesty, and cheating by councillors and officers. The problem with the other parties is that they won't upset officers in case they get in power, which is tacit agreement to wrongdoing.

Officers at the council have been breaking the rules with impunity for years, and only Mark Warters has the bottle and integrity to speak out.
[quote][p][bold]Batman Begins[/bold] wrote: I have read a lot lately, on this website and in other places, about how poor and dishonest the current Labour Administration is, as well as about how poor and dishonest the previous Liberal Democrat Administration was. So what are the alternatives? It seems to me voting for the Conservatives would only bring in the same nasty policies that they have implemented at National Level, not sure I want that in York! There’s always the UK independence Party, not sure York leaving the EU is such a good idea though! So where does that leave us? Do we keep giving the political class in York power over us, or do we stand up and say no more! Do we take control over our own destiny and try to create something better? Food for thought?[/p][/quote]We need a few more independents like Mark Warters, who is not afraid to speak out against corruption, dishonesty, and cheating by councillors and officers. The problem with the other parties is that they won't upset officers in case they get in power, which is tacit agreement to wrongdoing. Officers at the council have been breaking the rules with impunity for years, and only Mark Warters has the bottle and integrity to speak out. Badgers Drift
  • Score: 11

2:53pm Fri 28 Feb 14

meme says...

If the council had any brains they would finish off the James st link road which would help ease congestion around the city
but given the bridge closure supposedly cost £600,000 what would it cost for council to do this small link!
If the council had any brains they would finish off the James st link road which would help ease congestion around the city but given the bridge closure supposedly cost £600,000 [a figure I find unbelievable; is this really correct and supposedly incurred cost overruns] what would it cost for council to do this small link! meme
  • Score: 9

4:09pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Ex Coder RN says...

If what has been going on (if the Press report is in fact correct) is thought to be bringing the City and Council into disrepute it should be brought to the attention of the Council's Standards Committee and /or The District Auditor or Eric Pickles, Local Government Minister for consideration.
If what has been going on (if the Press report is in fact correct) is thought to be bringing the City and Council into disrepute it should be brought to the attention of the Council's Standards Committee and /or The District Auditor or Eric Pickles, Local Government Minister for consideration. Ex Coder RN
  • Score: 15

4:21pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

meme wrote:
If the council had any brains they would finish off the James st link road which would help ease congestion around the city but given the bridge closure supposedly cost £600,000 what would it cost for council to do this small link!
I think that Look north reported last night that of the £1.2m in fine receipts only £500,000 was left after costs. This means the costs of administering the fines was £700,000 plus the cost of the trial at £170,000 - a total of £870,000 of taxpayers money wasted !

Shame on City of York Council for causing so much loss, expense and inconvenience to so many for the anti-car agenda of the few.

Coun Merrett you are a disgrace ! Resign immediately !
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: If the council had any brains they would finish off the James st link road which would help ease congestion around the city but given the bridge closure supposedly cost £600,000 [a figure I find unbelievable; is this really correct and supposedly incurred cost overruns] what would it cost for council to do this small link![/p][/quote]I think that Look north reported last night that of the £1.2m in fine receipts only £500,000 was left after costs. This means the costs of administering the fines was £700,000 plus the cost of the trial at £170,000 - a total of £870,000 of taxpayers money wasted ! Shame on City of York Council for causing so much loss, expense and inconvenience to so many for the anti-car agenda of the few. Coun Merrett you are a disgrace ! Resign immediately ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 14

4:26pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Badgers Drift says...

Ex Coder RN wrote:
If what has been going on (if the Press report is in fact correct) is thought to be bringing the City and Council into disrepute it should be brought to the attention of the Council's Standards Committee and /or The District Auditor or Eric Pickles, Local Government Minister for consideration.
Who will do absolutely nothing !

Local Government regulations are unenforceable, that is why York Council ignore and break the rules with impunity. The LGO is impotent and fdoes its best to find ways of protecting LA's. Its a shambles, and a disgrace !
[quote][p][bold]Ex Coder RN[/bold] wrote: If what has been going on (if the Press report is in fact correct) is thought to be bringing the City and Council into disrepute it should be brought to the attention of the Council's Standards Committee and /or The District Auditor or Eric Pickles, Local Government Minister for consideration.[/p][/quote]Who will do absolutely nothing ! Local Government regulations are unenforceable, that is why York Council ignore and break the rules with impunity. The LGO is impotent and fdoes its best to find ways of protecting LA's. Its a shambles, and a disgrace ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: 3

4:39pm Fri 28 Feb 14

mmarshal says...

The restrictions and fines will continue for at least another 2 months. Meanwhile the unsuspecting visitor entering York from the A19 at Clifton Green is still welcomed with a sign directing him/her to drive straight on for the City Centre and National Railway Museum.
Statistics have been given to the effect that 80% of the fines have been levied against tourists and 20% against locals. Of that 20% we now know that includes the mistaken fining of taxi drivers. Surely even the most dim witted amongst CYC must realise that visitors do not know where Lendal Bridge is. Approaching from Bootham/Gilleygate it is not until visitors are right on top of the restriction that it becomes clear to them that they are approaching Lendal Bridge.
The restrictions and fines will continue for at least another 2 months. Meanwhile the unsuspecting visitor entering York from the A19 at Clifton Green is still welcomed with a sign directing him/her to drive straight on for the City Centre and National Railway Museum. Statistics have been given to the effect that 80% of the fines have been levied against tourists and 20% against locals. Of that 20% we now know that includes the mistaken fining of taxi drivers. Surely even the most dim witted amongst CYC must realise that visitors do not know where Lendal Bridge is. Approaching from Bootham/Gilleygate it is not until visitors are right on top of the restriction that it becomes clear to them that they are approaching Lendal Bridge. mmarshal
  • Score: 9

5:32pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Batman Begins wrote:
I have read a lot lately, on this website and in other places, about how poor and dishonest the current Labour Administration is, as well as about how poor and dishonest the previous Liberal Democrat Administration was.

So what are the alternatives? It seems to me voting for the Conservatives would only bring in the same nasty policies that they have implemented at National Level, not sure I want that in York!

There’s always the UK independence Party, not sure York leaving the EU is such a good idea though!

So where does that leave us? Do we keep giving the political class in York power over us, or do we stand up and say no more! Do we take control over our own destiny and try to create something better?

Food for thought?
I agree with you but the problem is that in this country we are all docile sheep force fed by the media. If they thought we getting unruly they would send a member of the royal family on a visit and we would stand by the kerb waving our silly little flags with tears in our eyes.
[quote][p][bold]Batman Begins[/bold] wrote: I have read a lot lately, on this website and in other places, about how poor and dishonest the current Labour Administration is, as well as about how poor and dishonest the previous Liberal Democrat Administration was. So what are the alternatives? It seems to me voting for the Conservatives would only bring in the same nasty policies that they have implemented at National Level, not sure I want that in York! There’s always the UK independence Party, not sure York leaving the EU is such a good idea though! So where does that leave us? Do we keep giving the political class in York power over us, or do we stand up and say no more! Do we take control over our own destiny and try to create something better? Food for thought?[/p][/quote]I agree with you but the problem is that in this country we are all docile sheep force fed by the media. If they thought we getting unruly they would send a member of the royal family on a visit and we would stand by the kerb waving our silly little flags with tears in our eyes. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 2

5:36pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Pinza-C55 says...

pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
In other words "it's a mess now but in a few generations when I am dead it will work. Of course if I am dead nobody will be able to tell me I was wrong".
What a copout.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]In other words "it's a mess now but in a few generations when I am dead it will work. Of course if I am dead nobody will be able to tell me I was wrong". What a copout. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 7

9:29pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Batman Begins says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?
No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.
Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.
I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking.............

....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey.
I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.
For you Paul, I think cycling alone is your future!
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: Do we think PP & HoofHearted are hiding....?[/p][/quote]No I'm not hiding. I'm behaving like a transport planner, and looking a few generations ahead, to a time when York could become swamped by two or maybe three times the number of car journeys being attempted. Doing nothing now to restrain private car use for many local journeys, is simply not an option.[/p][/quote]Paul a transport planner wouldn't have shut an inner ring road.. Fact. Being so single minded as to think cycling is the future is a poor reflection on transport planners.[/p][/quote]I didn't say that cycling alone was the future. Think of all the other options for local travel. Car sharing, bus, taxi, cycling, walking............. ....all these deserve artificial priority. What will it take to prise some commentators out of their seemingly beloved cars for every journey. I'm just off on a monthly car journey for a big supermarket shop now......don't use the bike for everything.[/p][/quote]For you Paul, I think cycling alone is your future! Batman Begins
  • Score: 6

12:32pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Cheeky face says...

Leaked e-mails prove the council fudged responses to klegitimate questions, including mine. Now I notice the order of information on one Lendal Bridge sign has been changed to agree with what I said in August,2013.
Namely the exemption times should be before the exception information.
Press pictures of 5.8.2013 and 1.3.2014 are contradictory.

I understand a barrister representating motorists with PCNs told the media of this on the first day of the trial Lendal Bridge restriction.

I hope the residents of York can see the propsed poll questionnaire before it is circulated.

I still await a full response to my letter of 10.12.2013 to the complaints team.
Leaked e-mails prove the council fudged responses to klegitimate questions, including mine. Now I notice the order of information on one Lendal Bridge sign has been changed to agree with what I said in August,2013. Namely the exemption times should be before the exception information. Press pictures of 5.8.2013 and 1.3.2014 are contradictory. I understand a barrister representating motorists with PCNs told the media of this on the first day of the trial Lendal Bridge restriction. I hope the residents of York can see the propsed poll questionnaire before it is circulated. I still await a full response to my letter of 10.12.2013 to the complaints team. Cheeky face
  • Score: 3

1:05pm Tue 4 Mar 14

meme says...

the signs should say
NO cars between restricted hours
£60 fine for beach
the signs should say NO cars between restricted hours £60 fine for beach meme
  • 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