Lendal Bridge fine drivers may get refunds

Lendal Bridge in York

Lendal Bridge in York

Updated in News York Press: Photograph of the Author by , Political Reporter

DRIVERS fined for breaking controversial traffic rules in York could find out within days whether they will get refunds, as the row over the restrictions continues.

A Government traffic expert’s damning judgement has said City of York Council had no power to issue penalty charge notices to motorists who breached traffic orders on Lendal Bridge and Coppergate, throwing the schemes into disarray.

The council expects “independent legal advice” on traffic adjudicator Stephen Knapp’s report tomorrow, which may decide whether drivers who have paid fines can be refunded. Traffic cameras on the bridge and Coppergate are still operating and fines being issued.

Council leader James Alexander has requested an internal review of both schemes, saying the way they have been carried out is not good enough. Coun Dave Merrett, cabinet member for transport, faces calls to resign following the Mr Knapp’s judgement, which analysed the restrictions while upholding one motorist’s appeal against a Coppergate PCN.

Coun Alexander said: “The principle of reducing private traffic in our city-centre is right, given the increasing problem we have with congestion, but we accept the implementation of this policy has not been to a standard my colleagues and I would expect.”

More than 53,000 fines were sent out during the six-month trial – which ended in February, with restrictions remaining until a decision on the scheme’s future on May 6 - with almost 10,000 issued on Coppergate over five months. The estimated income to the council from both schemes is £1.7 million, with about £700,000 ring-fenced for road and transport schemes after costs are deducted.

Visit York’s head Kate McMullen said the tourism agency had stressed its “deep concern” about visitors being “inadvertently” fined for using Lendal Bridge since the trial started, saying: “It is regrettable a first-warning system could not have been used.”

Susie Cawood, head of York and North Yorkshire Chamber of Commerce, said: “This closure has not worked and is having a negative impact on business and economic growth – the Chamber strongly urges the council to halt this trial immediately and not make it permanent.”

A spokesman for bus operator First said “reliability” had improved during the trial and this was one of the factors in increased passenger numbers. He said the firm would continue working with the council to look at ways of improving reliability further.

Conservative leader Coun Chris Steward said Coun Alexander’s review call was an attempt to “pass the buck” and Labour must take the blame for a “failed policy”. In an email to Coun Alexander and the council’s chief executive Kersten England, Liberal Democrat leader Keith Aspden said the authority had “lost control of events” and continuing the bridge closure is “untenable”.

Mr Knapp’s judgement said it was “unacceptable” that the council began the schemes knowing “sufficient resources to deal with challenges and appeals would not be available”. He said this had turned the appeals process into “a lottery”.

Comments (88)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:37am Thu 3 Apr 14

Overproof says...

The fines were unlawful.
Therefore, there must be automatic refunds issued (+interest)
The fines were unlawful. Therefore, there must be automatic refunds issued (+interest) Overproof
  • Score: -43

11:57am Thu 3 Apr 14

eeoodares says...

So when this money is given back, plus costs and interest and taking into account the cost of its implementation and the damage to York's reputation: HOW MUCH HAS THIS FIASCO COST OUR CITY!

If Labour have any morals then hang your heads and resign now, you are a disgrace!
So when this money is given back, plus costs and interest and taking into account the cost of its implementation and the damage to York's reputation: HOW MUCH HAS THIS FIASCO COST OUR CITY! If Labour have any morals then hang your heads and resign now, you are a disgrace! eeoodares
  • Score: -55

11:58am Thu 3 Apr 14

Bailed Out says...

Repayments without delay for the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate. Plus a payment for the distress caused.
Repayments without delay for the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate. Plus a payment for the distress caused. Bailed Out
  • Score: -106

12:16pm Thu 3 Apr 14

cynic3 says...

The adjudicator has ruled that the fines were not lawful. Legal advice will confirm that if the Council want to reverse this they will have to go to Court and, in all probability, will lose. Therefore there is no option but to refund all PCNs, or offer a refund on application. They need to set a figure for compensation, say £5 per PCN, and get on with announcing this as soon as possible. Further prevarication is postponing the inevitable and make them look (even more) ridiculous. Anybody issued a ticket after (say) Tuesday should refer the matter to the Ombudsman. Just think what that £5 will cost us all !!
The adjudicator has ruled that the fines were not lawful. Legal advice will confirm that if the Council want to reverse this they will have to go to Court and, in all probability, will lose. Therefore there is no option but to refund all PCNs, or offer a refund on application. They need to set a figure for compensation, say £5 per PCN, and get on with announcing this as soon as possible. Further prevarication is postponing the inevitable and make them look (even more) ridiculous. Anybody issued a ticket after (say) Tuesday should refer the matter to the Ombudsman. Just think what that £5 will cost us all !! cynic3
  • Score: -114

12:44pm Thu 3 Apr 14

ouseswimmer says...

Its not a question of 'May be refunded' Its a definite WILL be refunded. The Council are still living in la la land if they think they can keep the money gathered illegally.
Its not a question of 'May be refunded' Its a definite WILL be refunded. The Council are still living in la la land if they think they can keep the money gathered illegally. ouseswimmer
  • Score: -145

12:53pm Thu 3 Apr 14

FormerVisitor says...

I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate).
I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused.
By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there.
I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from
I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate). I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused. By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there. I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from FormerVisitor
  • Score: -148

1:03pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up.

So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on.

Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport!

Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road.

So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -117

1:07pm Thu 3 Apr 14

yorkonafork says...

eeoodares wrote:
So when this money is given back, plus costs and interest and taking into account the cost of its implementation and the damage to York's reputation: HOW MUCH HAS THIS FIASCO COST OUR CITY!

If Labour have any morals then hang your heads and resign now, you are a disgrace!
You're right and this could actually turn out to be an absolute nightmare for our city, which on no level is a good thing even if proving how wrong some people are.

This could easily go into the £millions once everything's been refunded. All this because they shut a bridge which shouldn't have been shut. Putting it bluntly, the York Council has technically spent millions of pounds and nothing's happen! We'll be in the same position as before just lots of money down which could be spent on crazy things like pot holes, park facilities or charity.

The is absolute gross misconduct and is one of few times where someone absolutely must resign or be fired. At very strong last resort but one that's needed.
[quote][p][bold]eeoodares[/bold] wrote: So when this money is given back, plus costs and interest and taking into account the cost of its implementation and the damage to York's reputation: HOW MUCH HAS THIS FIASCO COST OUR CITY! If Labour have any morals then hang your heads and resign now, you are a disgrace![/p][/quote]You're right and this could actually turn out to be an absolute nightmare for our city, which on no level is a good thing even if proving how wrong some people are. This could easily go into the £millions once everything's been refunded. All this because they shut a bridge which shouldn't have been shut. Putting it bluntly, the York Council has technically spent millions of pounds and nothing's happen! We'll be in the same position as before just lots of money down which could be spent on crazy things like pot holes, park facilities or charity. The is absolute gross misconduct and is one of few times where someone absolutely must resign or be fired. At very strong last resort but one that's needed. yorkonafork
  • Score: -142

1:19pm Thu 3 Apr 14

whitehorse says...

May get refunds? That's not bloody good enough. Money was taken from people without any precedent in law to support it. I think 'Will' would be a better option. Same as Merrett 'Will' resign over this debacle and Alexander 'Will' stand down from his position. Sometimes 'May' just isn't good enough.
May get refunds? That's not bloody good enough. Money was taken from people without any precedent in law to support it. I think 'Will' would be a better option. Same as Merrett 'Will' resign over this debacle and Alexander 'Will' stand down from his position. Sometimes 'May' just isn't good enough. whitehorse
  • Score: -95

1:21pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Dave Ruddock says...

I have sen mr (IT ME, I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW ME) Merrett . I,m sure that he is from the land of Nogg. Can we the electives of council membrs, sadly not appointments, get the slightest hint that Alexander an merret and cohorts understand they got this traffic problem wrong and a few other things. I HOPE and PRAY that any lawyers bills be pain by theses two and not the council payers, Give him a proper job directing traffic on the A64.......
I have sen mr (IT ME, I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW ME) Merrett . I,m sure that he is from the land of Nogg. Can we the electives of council membrs, sadly not appointments, get the slightest hint that Alexander an merret and cohorts understand they got this traffic problem wrong and a few other things. I HOPE and PRAY that any lawyers bills be pain by theses two and not the council payers, Give him a proper job directing traffic on the A64....... Dave Ruddock
  • Score: -104

1:24pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

Talking about monies being unlawfully witheld by CYC, this is not the only case is it ?

What about the £1,145,643.76 of unspent S106 monies, witheld over five years, much of which should be returned to the developers ? This was reported in the Press on 10th February...

http://www.yorkpress
.co.uk/news/10998580
.Developers____cash_
never_been_spent/?ac
tion=success

There is also the mysterious anomaly of £704,061 which disappeared because of supposed 'accounting' problems ?

http://www.yorkpress
.co.uk/news/11102324
.York_council_direct
or_apologises_over_i
naccurate_answer_to_
Freedom_of__Informat
ion_request/

The mismanagement and ineptitude of this council is scandalous. It is time for resignations and sackings of several councillors and senior officers responsible for this appalling state of affairs!
Talking about monies being unlawfully witheld by CYC, this is not the only case is it ? What about the £1,145,643.76 of unspent S106 monies, witheld over five years, much of which should be returned to the developers ? This was reported in the Press on 10th February... http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/10998580 .Developers____cash_ never_been_spent/?ac tion=success There is also the mysterious anomaly of £704,061 which disappeared because of supposed 'accounting' problems ? http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/11102324 .York_council_direct or_apologises_over_i naccurate_answer_to_ Freedom_of__Informat ion_request/ The mismanagement and ineptitude of this council is scandalous. It is time for resignations and sackings of several councillors and senior officers responsible for this appalling state of affairs! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -144

1:28pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Dave Ruddock says...

A spokesman for bus operator First said “reliability” had improved during the trial and this was one of the factors in increased passenger numbers. He said the firm would continue working with the council to look at ways of improving reliability further.

Funny when buses stop for extended times at Exhibition Sq, Theatre to adjust back to bus times and again on Station Rise to change drivers and again to get buses back to time schedules, also in other direction Station and again Theatre, so !st York where is the time effectivness ??
A spokesman for bus operator First said “reliability” had improved during the trial and this was one of the factors in increased passenger numbers. He said the firm would continue working with the council to look at ways of improving reliability further. Funny when buses stop for extended times at Exhibition Sq, Theatre to adjust back to bus times and again on Station Rise to change drivers and again to get buses back to time schedules, also in other direction Station and again Theatre, so !st York where is the time effectivness ?? Dave Ruddock
  • Score: -134

1:28pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Ousetunes says...

Anybody fined should not only be refunded but awarded interest.

And then the council should be sued for demanding money with menaces.

Finally, Merrett should have to carry the money, in pennies, in person, to each and every person who was initially fined.

And it's not that bad Mr Merrett: you could go via Lendal Bridge!
Anybody fined should not only be refunded but awarded interest. And then the council should be sued for demanding money with menaces. Finally, Merrett should have to carry the money, in pennies, in person, to each and every person who was initially fined. And it's not that bad Mr Merrett: you could go via Lendal Bridge! Ousetunes
  • Score: -111

1:31pm Thu 3 Apr 14

MorkofYork says...

The press readers had it right all along. We even knew when they were lying.
The press readers had it right all along. We even knew when they were lying. MorkofYork
  • Score: -100

1:32pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
Talking about monies being unlawfully witheld by CYC, this is not the only case is it ? What about the £1,145,643.76 of unspent S106 monies, witheld over five years, much of which should be returned to the developers ? This was reported in the Press on 10th February... http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/10998580 .Developers____cash_ never_been_spent/?ac tion=success There is also the mysterious anomaly of £704,061 which disappeared because of supposed 'accounting' problems ? http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/11102324 .York_council_direct or_apologises_over_i naccurate_answer_to_ Freedom_of__Informat ion_request/ The mismanagement and ineptitude of this council is scandalous. It is time for resignations and sackings of several councillors and senior officers responsible for this appalling state of affairs!
BTW, the unspent S106 monies were discovered by an FOI on 27th January, and a couple of developers who I know have requested refunds have received very poor treatment.

One asked for his £25,699.47 back on 28th January and after two months of being passed from the planning to the transport departments, the council then told him that the monies had in fact been spent. This was after the accounting problems had been found, so this figure was not picked up in the audit that discovered the £704,061 disparity/anomaly.

The other is still being given the runaround after two months of chasing.

This is how the council treat people whose monies they are witholding illegally.

It's CRIMINAL !
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: Talking about monies being unlawfully witheld by CYC, this is not the only case is it ? What about the £1,145,643.76 of unspent S106 monies, witheld over five years, much of which should be returned to the developers ? This was reported in the Press on 10th February... http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/10998580 .Developers____cash_ never_been_spent/?ac tion=success There is also the mysterious anomaly of £704,061 which disappeared because of supposed 'accounting' problems ? http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/11102324 .York_council_direct or_apologises_over_i naccurate_answer_to_ Freedom_of__Informat ion_request/ The mismanagement and ineptitude of this council is scandalous. It is time for resignations and sackings of several councillors and senior officers responsible for this appalling state of affairs![/p][/quote]BTW, the unspent S106 monies were discovered by an FOI on 27th January, and a couple of developers who I know have requested refunds have received very poor treatment. One asked for his £25,699.47 back on 28th January and after two months of being passed from the planning to the transport departments, the council then told him that the monies had in fact been spent. This was after the accounting problems had been found, so this figure was not picked up in the audit that discovered the £704,061 disparity/anomaly. The other is still being given the runaround after two months of chasing. This is how the council treat people whose monies they are witholding illegally. It's CRIMINAL ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -143

1:35pm Thu 3 Apr 14

duffy says...

I'm baffled, where have the posters blaming the "stupid car drivers gone" ?
I'm baffled, where have the posters blaming the "stupid car drivers gone" ? duffy
  • Score: -49

1:42pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Got a life says...

Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced?

If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences?

For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today!
Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced? If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences? For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today! Got a life
  • Score: -61

1:46pm Thu 3 Apr 14

vax2002 says...

I would say serve them a letter before action for the full amount plus a compensator amount for distress and harassment.
See how they like it up them for a change.
I would say serve them a letter before action for the full amount plus a compensator amount for distress and harassment. See how they like it up them for a change. vax2002
  • Score: -26

1:50pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Sillybillies says...

Dave Ruddock wrote:
I have sen mr (IT ME, I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW ME) Merrett . I,m sure that he is from the land of Nogg. Can we the electives of council membrs, sadly not appointments, get the slightest hint that Alexander an merret and cohorts understand they got this traffic problem wrong and a few other things. I HOPE and PRAY that any lawyers bills be pain by theses two and not the council payers, Give him a proper job directing traffic on the A64.......
And in English?
[quote][p][bold]Dave Ruddock[/bold] wrote: I have sen mr (IT ME, I WANT EVERYONE TO KNOW ME) Merrett . I,m sure that he is from the land of Nogg. Can we the electives of council membrs, sadly not appointments, get the slightest hint that Alexander an merret and cohorts understand they got this traffic problem wrong and a few other things. I HOPE and PRAY that any lawyers bills be pain by theses two and not the council payers, Give him a proper job directing traffic on the A64.......[/p][/quote]And in English? Sillybillies
  • Score: -57

1:57pm Thu 3 Apr 14

andy fowler says...

Alexander should resign NOW!!!! Refund every single fine and disappear for ever. The creature is a total disgrace.

He should be prosecuted for theft!!!!!
Alexander should resign NOW!!!! Refund every single fine and disappear for ever. The creature is a total disgrace. He should be prosecuted for theft!!!!! andy fowler
  • Score: -15

2:22pm Thu 3 Apr 14

piaggio1 says...

I find it more amazing that non of the corrupt 3 have not had the balls to be interviewed.
Say.s a lot really.
They really DO hate us you know.
I find it more amazing that non of the corrupt 3 have not had the balls to be interviewed. Say.s a lot really. They really DO hate us you know. piaggio1
  • Score: -17

2:34pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up.

So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on.

Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport!

Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road.

So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination.
If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car.
The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge. pedalling paul
  • Score: 30

2:38pm Thu 3 Apr 14

the original Homer says...

piaggio1 wrote:
I find it more amazing that non of the corrupt 3 have not had the balls to be interviewed.
Say.s a lot really.
They really DO hate us you know.
Think you'll find ALL of the corrupt 3 have not had the balls to be interviewed - unless you've seen some interviews the rest of us missed.
[quote][p][bold]piaggio1[/bold] wrote: I find it more amazing that non of the corrupt 3 have not had the balls to be interviewed. Say.s a lot really. They really DO hate us you know.[/p][/quote]Think you'll find ALL of the corrupt 3 have not had the balls to be interviewed - unless you've seen some interviews the rest of us missed. the original Homer
  • Score: -113

2:39pm Thu 3 Apr 14

mel_drew says...

I wonder if Look North are minded to invite Merret back. Harry Gration gave him a surprisingly stern time a few weeks back when the competence of the management of the bridge closure was merely a matter of opinion. Now that it has been proven to be a case of gross mismanagement, Harry could have a field day. Better still, Look North could even ask Paxman to do a guest spot.
I wonder if Look North are minded to invite Merret back. Harry Gration gave him a surprisingly stern time a few weeks back when the competence of the management of the bridge closure was merely a matter of opinion. Now that it has been proven to be a case of gross mismanagement, Harry could have a field day. Better still, Look North could even ask Paxman to do a guest spot. mel_drew
  • Score: -79

2:40pm Thu 3 Apr 14

andy fowler says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up.

So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on.

Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport!

Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road.

So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination.
If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car.
The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
In your 4x4 are you. Cycle obsessed Alexander apologist!
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.[/p][/quote]In your 4x4 are you. Cycle obsessed Alexander apologist! andy fowler
  • Score: -128

2:45pm Thu 3 Apr 14

LibDem says...

A written answer from Cllr Merrett has been published today to a question posed at the Council meeting held on 27th March.

In his reply Cllr Merrett admits that the Council have now banked over £2 million from PCNs issued on Lendal Bridge and Coppergate!

A lot of other stuff has also emerged http://tinyurl.com/L
endal-2M

It is inconceivable that the Council is still issuing PCNs based on ANPR evidence.
A written answer from Cllr Merrett has been published today to a question posed at the Council meeting held on 27th March. In his reply Cllr Merrett admits that the Council have now banked over £2 million from PCNs issued on Lendal Bridge and Coppergate! A lot of other stuff has also emerged http://tinyurl.com/L endal-2M It is inconceivable that the Council is still issuing PCNs based on ANPR evidence. LibDem
  • Score: -94

2:47pm Thu 3 Apr 14

piaggio1 says...

Congestion charge ??????
Oh god .you have.nt mentioned that to the 3 wise monkeys have you!
Congestion charge ?????? Oh god .you have.nt mentioned that to the 3 wise monkeys have you! piaggio1
  • Score: -115

2:57pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
Maybe your name?? if you were called walkingtrainbussing Paul I might have come to that conclusion.

Yes gridlock caused by shutting an inner ring. No paul as stated above a congestion charge is not the future. Better infrastructure is that removes vehicles from roads. After all if you are talking green busses pollute worse then anything and in york we are constantly increasing the number of these. Do other cities rely on busses? or are they planning to invest for the future?
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.[/p][/quote]Maybe your name?? if you were called walkingtrainbussing Paul I might have come to that conclusion. Yes gridlock caused by shutting an inner ring. No paul as stated above a congestion charge is not the future. Better infrastructure is that removes vehicles from roads. After all if you are talking green busses pollute worse then anything and in york we are constantly increasing the number of these. Do other cities rely on busses? or are they planning to invest for the future? Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -77

2:58pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments.

First 15 are as follows:-

All +
43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6

Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.
As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time. Badgers Drift
  • Score: -105

3:08pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Got a life says...

piaggio1 wrote:
Congestion charge ??????
Oh god .you have.nt mentioned that to the 3 wise monkeys have you!
didn't realise that they are wise monkeys!

Monkeys perhaps.
[quote][p][bold]piaggio1[/bold] wrote: Congestion charge ?????? Oh god .you have.nt mentioned that to the 3 wise monkeys have you![/p][/quote]didn't realise that they are wise monkeys! Monkeys perhaps. Got a life
  • Score: -64

3:11pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

The 'internal review' requested by Alexander is, as others have already pointed out, an attempt at passing the buck, and ducking the blame.

Ultimately there are four officials responsible for this; Kersten England, James Alexander, Dave Merrett and Darren Richardson. One of them (DR) announced conveniently two weeks ago that he is leaving, and the other three should do the same.

Kersten England tweeted that she moved house at the weekend, so maybe she is keeping something else from us ?

We need a clear out of the regime that is causing chaos in York, and their replacements should be told to get a grip - a grip on policy, a grip on spending, and a grip on the politicised officers who are as much of the problem as the Labour councillors selling us and York to their Labour chums in West Yorkshire !
The 'internal review' requested by Alexander is, as others have already pointed out, an attempt at passing the buck, and ducking the blame. Ultimately there are four officials responsible for this; Kersten England, James Alexander, Dave Merrett and Darren Richardson. One of them (DR) announced conveniently two weeks ago that he is leaving, and the other three should do the same. Kersten England tweeted that she moved house at the weekend, so maybe she is keeping something else from us ? We need a clear out of the regime that is causing chaos in York, and their replacements should be told to get a grip - a grip on policy, a grip on spending, and a grip on the politicised officers who are as much of the problem as the Labour councillors selling us and York to their Labour chums in West Yorkshire ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -36

3:12pm Thu 3 Apr 14

bolero says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up.

So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on.

Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport!

Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road.

So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination.
If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car.
The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
The only gridlock is in the brains of those in charge of our city, you Peddling Pillock.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.[/p][/quote]The only gridlock is in the brains of those in charge of our city, you Peddling Pillock. bolero
  • Score: -24

3:12pm Thu 3 Apr 14

excabbie says...

They should follow colchester councils lead and refund with out argument, if they change the signs, then fair enough, issue fines on coppergate!

http://www.eadt.co.u
k/news/politics/colc
hester_council_agree
s_to_waive_up_to_1m_
of_penalty_charges_d
ue_to_bus_lane_confu
sion_1_3188171

Essex County Council has granted an amnesty on penalty charge notices totalling £1 million issued to motorists confused by new bus lane signs.

Comments Email Print
The move comes after the authority received a high level of enquiries and petitions from drivers who have complained about the bus lane signs and road markings on North Hill and High Street in Colchester town centre.

Cabinet member for highways and transportation at Essex County Council, Rodney Bass, said: “We have received a high volume of correspondence from motorists regarding the clarity of the bus lanes in Colchester town centre, and therefore the decision has been taken to grant an amnesty on all penalty charge notices issued so far. I have asked for additional signage and road markings to be installed as soon as possible to make it clearer to motorists where the bus lanes are located.”

The council says it will start to enforce penalty charge notices again from Sunday January 12. Motorists who have received a penalty charge notice prior to this date will not be charged and drivers who have already paid a penalty charge will receive a full refund. People do not need to contact the county council to obtain a refund, as these will be processed automatically and as soon as practicable.
They should follow colchester councils lead and refund with out argument, if they change the signs, then fair enough, issue fines on coppergate! http://www.eadt.co.u k/news/politics/colc hester_council_agree s_to_waive_up_to_1m_ of_penalty_charges_d ue_to_bus_lane_confu sion_1_3188171 Essex County Council has granted an amnesty on penalty charge notices totalling £1 million issued to motorists confused by new bus lane signs. Comments Email Print The move comes after the authority received a high level of enquiries and petitions from drivers who have complained about the bus lane signs and road markings on North Hill and High Street in Colchester town centre. Cabinet member for highways and transportation at Essex County Council, Rodney Bass, said: “We have received a high volume of correspondence from motorists regarding the clarity of the bus lanes in Colchester town centre, and therefore the decision has been taken to grant an amnesty on all penalty charge notices issued so far. I have asked for additional signage and road markings to be installed as soon as possible to make it clearer to motorists where the bus lanes are located.” The council says it will start to enforce penalty charge notices again from Sunday January 12. Motorists who have received a penalty charge notice prior to this date will not be charged and drivers who have already paid a penalty charge will receive a full refund. People do not need to contact the county council to obtain a refund, as these will be processed automatically and as soon as practicable. excabbie
  • Score: -40

3:15pm Thu 3 Apr 14

ReginaldBiscuit says...

FormerVisitor wrote:
I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate).
I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused.
By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there.
I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from
I can spot a hoax a mile-off and you sir, are a hoax. For being 'far' too specific, for hiding behind anonymity. Your post smells of bitterness and a bit of self-loathing. You're human, par for the course.

Just saying. Like.
[quote][p][bold]FormerVisitor[/bold] wrote: I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate). I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused. By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there. I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from[/p][/quote]I can spot a hoax a mile-off and you sir, are a hoax. For being 'far' too specific, for hiding behind anonymity. Your post smells of bitterness and a bit of self-loathing. You're human, par for the course. Just saying. Like. ReginaldBiscuit
  • Score: -36

3:24pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.
-17 in as many minutes, whilst all the other scores are untouched.

Looks like the mongrel has had his/her tea break, and just had enough time to mark the above post down.

Lets see how it changes in the next couple of hours.

I'm happy that he/she targets me. It tells me that I'm getting to him/her, which is just what I want :))

Do your worst, you ignorant pest !
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.[/p][/quote]-17 in as many minutes, whilst all the other scores are untouched. Looks like the mongrel has had his/her tea break, and just had enough time to mark the above post down. Lets see how it changes in the next couple of hours. I'm happy that he/she targets me. It tells me that I'm getting to him/her, which is just what I want :)) Do your worst, you ignorant pest ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -96

3:26pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote: As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.
-17 in as many minutes, whilst all the other scores are untouched. Looks like the mongrel has had his/her tea break, and just had enough time to mark the above post down. Lets see how it changes in the next couple of hours. I'm happy that he/she targets me. It tells me that I'm getting to him/her, which is just what I want :)) Do your worst, you ignorant pest !
that was us marking you down!!! hahahaha
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.[/p][/quote]-17 in as many minutes, whilst all the other scores are untouched. Looks like the mongrel has had his/her tea break, and just had enough time to mark the above post down. Lets see how it changes in the next couple of hours. I'm happy that he/she targets me. It tells me that I'm getting to him/her, which is just what I want :)) Do your worst, you ignorant pest ![/p][/quote]that was us marking you down!!! hahahaha Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -118

3:27pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

ReginaldBiscuit wrote:
FormerVisitor wrote: I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate). I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused. By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there. I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from
I can spot a hoax a mile-off and you sir, are a hoax. For being 'far' too specific, for hiding behind anonymity. Your post smells of bitterness and a bit of self-loathing. You're human, par for the course. Just saying. Like.
What are you ReginaldBiscuit ?

A bitter Labour apologist?

Just saying, like!
[quote][p][bold]ReginaldBiscuit[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FormerVisitor[/bold] wrote: I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate). I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused. By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there. I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from[/p][/quote]I can spot a hoax a mile-off and you sir, are a hoax. For being 'far' too specific, for hiding behind anonymity. Your post smells of bitterness and a bit of self-loathing. You're human, par for the course. Just saying. Like.[/p][/quote]What are you ReginaldBiscuit ? A bitter Labour apologist? Just saying, like! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -102

3:30pm Thu 3 Apr 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote: As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.
-17 in as many minutes, whilst all the other scores are untouched. Looks like the mongrel has had his/her tea break, and just had enough time to mark the above post down. Lets see how it changes in the next couple of hours. I'm happy that he/she targets me. It tells me that I'm getting to him/her, which is just what I want :)) Do your worst, you ignorant pest !
that was us marking you down!!! hahahaha
No I'm Spartacus!
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: As usual, the current true scores reflect readers opinions on the comments. First 15 are as follows:- All + 43, 60, 28, 20, 20, 14, 14, 15, 13, 3, 10, 2, 11, 8, & 6 Such a shame that an ignorant imbecile has been skewing the scores after he/she gets home from work at tea-time.[/p][/quote]-17 in as many minutes, whilst all the other scores are untouched. Looks like the mongrel has had his/her tea break, and just had enough time to mark the above post down. Lets see how it changes in the next couple of hours. I'm happy that he/she targets me. It tells me that I'm getting to him/her, which is just what I want :)) Do your worst, you ignorant pest ![/p][/quote]that was us marking you down!!! hahahaha[/p][/quote]No I'm Spartacus! AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -63

3:30pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Cheeky face says...

I think the Essex County Council refunded £1.3m.. I told CofYC this in Feb 2014! They are obviously too busy to reply.

But worse; I still await replies to my enquiries from York council going back to August on the issues detailed by the adjudicator.An even earlier complaint which I sent in 2011 is still being ignored.

The money collected from PCNs is immoral; and illegal and unlawful; an MUST be returned.

I trust the cameras are now turned off!
I think the Essex County Council refunded £1.3m.. I told CofYC this in Feb 2014! They are obviously too busy to reply. But worse; I still await replies to my enquiries from York council going back to August on the issues detailed by the adjudicator.An even earlier complaint which I sent in 2011 is still being ignored. The money collected from PCNs is immoral; and illegal and unlawful; an MUST be returned. I trust the cameras are now turned off! Cheeky face
  • Score: -96

3:34pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skateboarding simon says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
if york was so in favour of sustainable transport, why have i spent most of my life being treated like a criminal for getting from a-b on my skateboard. I take up no road space but i get classed as a menace to york.
I haven't disagreed with a lot of your points but you undermine your own posts half the time and have lost any credability from constantly trying to defend merret.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.[/p][/quote]if york was so in favour of sustainable transport, why have i spent most of my life being treated like a criminal for getting from a-b on my skateboard. I take up no road space but i get classed as a menace to york. I haven't disagreed with a lot of your points but you undermine your own posts half the time and have lost any credability from constantly trying to defend merret. skateboarding simon
  • Score: -94

3:37pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm.

They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2.

Glad the muppet is targetting me. :)

Keep it up, you p**t !
My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm. They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2. Glad the muppet is targetting me. :) Keep it up, you p**t ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -85

4:04pm Thu 3 Apr 14

bolero says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm.

They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2.

Glad the muppet is targetting me. :)

Keep it up, you p**t !
Funny that but I think Paul the peddling pillock has just arrived home.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm. They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2. Glad the muppet is targetting me. :) Keep it up, you p**t ![/p][/quote]Funny that but I think Paul the peddling pillock has just arrived home. bolero
  • Score: -113

4:27pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Meldrew2 says...

Well this on isn't a hoax or a set up! This is from a friend of mine who lives near Miiddlesbrough :

"I for one shall be demanding my money back, it cost me £95, I did contest it on the grounds that I was forced into the lane by a bloody ignorant bus driver who refused to let me in once I saw the sign which was very ambiguous"
Well this on isn't a hoax or a set up! This is from a friend of mine who lives near Miiddlesbrough : "I for one shall be demanding my money back, it cost me £95, I did contest it on the grounds that I was forced into the lane by a bloody ignorant bus driver who refused to let me in once I saw the sign which was very ambiguous" Meldrew2
  • Score: -107

4:44pm Thu 3 Apr 14

sambo1943 says...

And what about the 20mph limits the village idiots imposed on Acomb ?could this be illegal as well ? hope so !!
And what about the 20mph limits the village idiots imposed on Acomb ?could this be illegal as well ? hope so !! sambo1943
  • Score: -48

5:01pm Thu 3 Apr 14

mickeytops says...

Do the decent thing and get your head out of your backside and listen to the people of York and resign now instead of making up excuses. The quote of give him a job on the A64, I would not let them idiots near the A64 as they will put a tole on that before we know it ( oh no, I have just given him his next light bulb moment).
At the end of all this we the Council tax payers will have to pay for there mistakes on our next rise next Year. Role on the elections and lets all vote thes incompetent idiots out, including Merrett, Lang and Alexander.
And god help us when they then will try and get a job at a Company in York, hopefully they will all leave this wonderfull City.
Resign now or are you just not listening to the people that voted you in, all you can say it is the other parties trying to discredit you, you have discredited yourselves and the people of York want you out and not the other parties.
Do the decent thing and get your head out of your backside and listen to the people of York and resign now instead of making up excuses. The quote of give him a job on the A64, I would not let them idiots near the A64 as they will put a tole on that before we know it ( oh no, I have just given him his next light bulb moment). At the end of all this we the Council tax payers will have to pay for there mistakes on our next rise next Year. Role on the elections and lets all vote thes incompetent idiots out, including Merrett, Lang and Alexander. And god help us when they then will try and get a job at a Company in York, hopefully they will all leave this wonderfull City. Resign now or are you just not listening to the people that voted you in, all you can say it is the other parties trying to discredit you, you have discredited yourselves and the people of York want you out and not the other parties. mickeytops
  • Score: -62

5:26pm Thu 3 Apr 14

E Jacques says...

Whey will our political representatives admit the Lendal Bridge closure has been a costly failure dreamed up by arrogant council officers and political leaders who failed to consult the people who pay their wages and who they are supposed to represent.

In most other walk of life (bar the political elite, bankers and many establishment figures) people would be held to account, so when are those responsible, including the council's CEO, going to pay for this undemocratic, costly and unlawful fiasco?
Whey will our political representatives admit the Lendal Bridge closure has been a costly failure dreamed up by arrogant council officers and political leaders who failed to consult the people who pay their wages and who they are supposed to represent. In most other walk of life (bar the political elite, bankers and many establishment figures) people would be held to account, so when are those responsible, including the council's CEO, going to pay for this undemocratic, costly and unlawful fiasco? E Jacques
  • Score: -49

5:32pm Thu 3 Apr 14

hendom says...

FormerVisitor wrote:
I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate).
I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused.
By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there.
I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from
Be assured former visitor that the vast majority of York residents opposed this closure. Many York residents have also either been caught out or severely inconvenienced by this ill thought out implementation..
[quote][p][bold]FormerVisitor[/bold] wrote: I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate). I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused. By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there. I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from[/p][/quote]Be assured former visitor that the vast majority of York residents opposed this closure. Many York residents have also either been caught out or severely inconvenienced by this ill thought out implementation.. hendom
  • Score: -13

5:43pm Thu 3 Apr 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

It is no secret that the very same people responsible for this catastrophic failure are also responsible for the final decision relating to Lendal.

How can anyone have confidence in anything that is revealed/published by these people (other than via FOI requests). We are only privy to sanitised and polished versions of what they want to tell us which is always supportive of what they want to do.

Council tax payers are now facing a massive bill for this un-forgivable failure while those responsible hunker down avoiding the media and look to justify this calamitous failure while continuing down the same route to the same objective.

May 6th (decision day) we will see the permanent implementation of a restriction on Lendal based on the rhetoric that is being espoused from our so called leaders, it is successful, it has not caused traffic delays and bus reliability has improved. All of which contradicts the experiences of thousands of resident.

The only time this will be resolved is after the next local elections and the removal of Labour from their current un-tenable position. The arrogance of labour coupled with their disrespect of the electorate has been evident in just about every aspect they have undertaken.

In the private sector the level of failure on a single project such as Lendal would not be tolerated, but it's far more than Lendal. Leadership is about doing the right things, management is about doing things right, there is little evidence of leadership or management but plenty of evidence of doing what they want.

Labour can hope the big sell of the community stadium in February 2015 is going to be an election winner for them, but I will be thanking John Lewis and Mark & Spencers with the only contribution from Yorks Labour council being delay to a convenient point in time which they believe benefits them through public perception.

I really don't care who forms the next council for York, just so long as it's not the current incompetents.
It is no secret that the very same people responsible for this catastrophic failure are also responsible for the final decision relating to Lendal. How can anyone have confidence in anything that is revealed/published by these people (other than via FOI requests). We are only privy to sanitised and polished versions of what they want to tell us which is always supportive of what they want to do. Council tax payers are now facing a massive bill for this un-forgivable failure while those responsible hunker down avoiding the media and look to justify this calamitous failure while continuing down the same route to the same objective. May 6th (decision day) we will see the permanent implementation of a restriction on Lendal based on the rhetoric that is being espoused from our so called leaders, it is successful, it has not caused traffic delays and bus reliability has improved. All of which contradicts the experiences of thousands of resident. The only time this will be resolved is after the next local elections and the removal of Labour from their current un-tenable position. The arrogance of labour coupled with their disrespect of the electorate has been evident in just about every aspect they have undertaken. In the private sector the level of failure on a single project such as Lendal would not be tolerated, but it's far more than Lendal. Leadership is about doing the right things, management is about doing things right, there is little evidence of leadership or management but plenty of evidence of doing what they want. Labour can hope the big sell of the community stadium in February 2015 is going to be an election winner for them, but I will be thanking John Lewis and Mark & Spencers with the only contribution from Yorks Labour council being delay to a convenient point in time which they believe benefits them through public perception. I really don't care who forms the next council for York, just so long as it's not the current incompetents. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -3

6:12pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm. They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2. Glad the muppet is targetting me. :) Keep it up, you p**t !
So, since the hacker marked my scores down earlier, they have improved:-

-5 is now +4, -10 now -4, -22 now -19, -6 now +4, -14 now -9, +1 now +8, but 3.37pm tweet -13.

First 15 are as follows:-
All + except shown as -
61, 74, 41, 31, 32, 26, 27, 31, 30, 11, 4, 14, 22, 24, and -4

Waiting to see if the mongrel starts again, after his tea....
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm. They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2. Glad the muppet is targetting me. :) Keep it up, you p**t ![/p][/quote]So, since the hacker marked my scores down earlier, they have improved:- -5 is now +4, -10 now -4, -22 now -19, -6 now +4, -14 now -9, +1 now +8, but 3.37pm tweet -13. First 15 are as follows:- All + except shown as - 61, 74, 41, 31, 32, 26, 27, 31, 30, 11, 4, 14, 22, 24, and -4 Waiting to see if the mongrel starts again, after his tea.... Badgers Drift
  • Score: -13

6:25pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

bolero wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm.

They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2.

Glad the muppet is targetting me. :)

Keep it up, you p**t !
Funny that but I think Paul the peddling pillock has just arrived home.
Not a bad guesstimate. Anyone who really wants to trumpet their message can hire the pedal powered mobile advertising Digibkie.
http://mediafiles.th
edms.co.uk/Publicati
on/YK/cms/pdf/Visit%
20York%20DigiBike%20
Leaflet%202014.pdf
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: My posts at 1.24pm and 1.32pm were scored at +10 and +6 at 2.47pm. They are now -5 and -12, with my other three subsequent posts -23, -6 and +2. Glad the muppet is targetting me. :) Keep it up, you p**t ![/p][/quote]Funny that but I think Paul the peddling pillock has just arrived home.[/p][/quote]Not a bad guesstimate. Anyone who really wants to trumpet their message can hire the pedal powered mobile advertising Digibkie. http://mediafiles.th edms.co.uk/Publicati on/YK/cms/pdf/Visit% 20York%20DigiBike%20 Leaflet%202014.pdf pedalling paul
  • Score: -30

6:39pm Thu 3 Apr 14

big smiffy says...

The idea of closing the bridge was a big mistake by cyc and now it should be reopened to traffic what the bridge was designed and built for. so get it reopened and this city can get back on its feet so visitors are not scared to visit and traffic can move around easier.
The idea of closing the bridge was a big mistake by cyc and now it should be reopened to traffic what the bridge was designed and built for. so get it reopened and this city can get back on its feet so visitors are not scared to visit and traffic can move around easier. big smiffy
  • Score: -188

6:44pm Thu 3 Apr 14

tobefair says...

Badgers Drift stop worrying about the score manipulator, Just remember that when it is obvious that he/she/they have been at work, transpose the minus scores to plusses. A minus 60 score becomes a plus 60 score. That way it does not matter what the manipulator does the scores will always reflect what everyone on here knows is the consensus of opinion.
Badgers Drift stop worrying about the score manipulator, Just remember that when it is obvious that he/she/they have been at work, transpose the minus scores to plusses. A minus 60 score becomes a plus 60 score. That way it does not matter what the manipulator does the scores will always reflect what everyone on here knows is the consensus of opinion. tobefair
  • Score: -269

6:47pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Silver says...

If we as individuals are caught doing something illegal we get punished. So far the council giving the money back is not actually a punishment. So can the police arrest the council?
If we as individuals are caught doing something illegal we get punished. So far the council giving the money back is not actually a punishment. So can the police arrest the council? Silver
  • Score: -133

7:05pm Thu 3 Apr 14

AnotherPointofView says...

hendom wrote:
FormerVisitor wrote:
I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate).
I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused.
By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there.
I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from
Be assured former visitor that the vast majority of York residents opposed this closure. Many York residents have also either been caught out or severely inconvenienced by this ill thought out implementation..
I agree with FormerVisitor, The point about good people of York owing you money is incorrect. It should be the idiotic councillors who wouldn't listen. They should be personally liable to you for a refund.

Regrettably it will be the "good people" of York who will end up footing the bill though.
[quote][p][bold]hendom[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FormerVisitor[/bold] wrote: I came to your city, followed my sat nav and got a fine for using the bridge (signing of the 'restriction' was totally inadequate). I hope to get my money back plus the 'service charge' my lease company imposed for dealing with the fine - that's an extra £20 the good citizens of York owe me, plus a few quid for the distress and inconvenience caused. By the way, I wont be coming back - if you hate the way I get to your city so much, you can go without the cash I would spend when I get there. I look forward to visiting other cities who appreciate where the money comes from[/p][/quote]Be assured former visitor that the vast majority of York residents opposed this closure. Many York residents have also either been caught out or severely inconvenienced by this ill thought out implementation..[/p][/quote]I agree with FormerVisitor, The point about good people of York owing you money is incorrect. It should be the idiotic councillors who wouldn't listen. They should be personally liable to you for a refund. Regrettably it will be the "good people" of York who will end up footing the bill though. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: -24

7:11pm Thu 3 Apr 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

The only person being tortured by the Mark-Down Mongrel is the mongrels themselves.

Crack on, you must be just so close to a breakdown by now.

Woof, Woof.
The only person being tortured by the Mark-Down Mongrel is the mongrels themselves. Crack on, you must be just so close to a breakdown by now. Woof, Woof. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -115

7:16pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Daname says...

Oh no, my last post has been deleted :-( And it wasn't overly controversial. I thought we lived in a democratic society where we can all have our say? Freedom of speech and all that? Will we all have to have the same haircut from now on.......?
Oh no, my last post has been deleted :-( And it wasn't overly controversial. I thought we lived in a democratic society where we can all have our say? Freedom of speech and all that? Will we all have to have the same haircut from now on.......? Daname
  • Score: -71

7:19pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Back and Beyond says...

How many people are freely using the Bridge again and ignoring the stance of the Council by keeping the cameras on?
How many people are freely using the Bridge again and ignoring the stance of the Council by keeping the cameras on? Back and Beyond
  • Score: -116

8:59pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Dr Brian says...

Got a life wrote:
Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced?

If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences?

For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today!
Quite easily - we know that Merrtt TSL and The Fuhrer Alexander won't resign, but why don't ALL the fair minded Labour councillors resign the Labour whipand become independent - Tories Lib Dems force a vote of no confidence and the Independents Tories and Lib Dems form a coalition till next year and we can wave bye bye to Jimmy and the other 2 fools.
[quote][p][bold]Got a life[/bold] wrote: Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced? If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences? For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today![/p][/quote]Quite easily - we know that Merrtt TSL and The Fuhrer Alexander won't resign, but why don't ALL the fair minded Labour councillors resign the Labour whipand become independent - Tories Lib Dems force a vote of no confidence and the Independents Tories and Lib Dems form a coalition till next year and we can wave bye bye to Jimmy and the other 2 fools. Dr Brian
  • Score: -82

9:02pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Dr Brian says...

andy fowler wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up.

So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on.

Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport!

Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road.

So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination.
If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car.
The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
In your 4x4 are you. Cycle obsessed Alexander apologist!
Good to see you are using your free rail passes Paul - I remember you well from your days in the BR signalling department :)
[quote][p][bold]andy fowler[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.[/p][/quote]In your 4x4 are you. Cycle obsessed Alexander apologist![/p][/quote]Good to see you are using your free rail passes Paul - I remember you well from your days in the BR signalling department :) Dr Brian
  • Score: -141

9:12pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Got a life says...

Dr Brian wrote:
Got a life wrote:
Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced?

If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences?

For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today!
Quite easily - we know that Merrtt TSL and The Fuhrer Alexander won't resign, but why don't ALL the fair minded Labour councillors resign the Labour whipand become independent - Tories Lib Dems force a vote of no confidence and the Independents Tories and Lib Dems form a coalition till next year and we can wave bye bye to Jimmy and the other 2 fools.
And the reason why they won't resign is?

Who in the right mind would employ them?

York has become a mess and needs sorting by professional people who understand the needs of the city, its visitors and residents. I completely agree with Dr Brian
[quote][p][bold]Dr Brian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Got a life[/bold] wrote: Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced? If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences? For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today![/p][/quote]Quite easily - we know that Merrtt TSL and The Fuhrer Alexander won't resign, but why don't ALL the fair minded Labour councillors resign the Labour whipand become independent - Tories Lib Dems force a vote of no confidence and the Independents Tories and Lib Dems form a coalition till next year and we can wave bye bye to Jimmy and the other 2 fools.[/p][/quote]And the reason why they won't resign is? Who in the right mind would employ them? York has become a mess and needs sorting by professional people who understand the needs of the city, its visitors and residents. I completely agree with Dr Brian Got a life
  • Score: -160

9:20pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Silver says...

Got a life wrote:
Dr Brian wrote:
Got a life wrote:
Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced?

If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences?

For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today!
Quite easily - we know that Merrtt TSL and The Fuhrer Alexander won't resign, but why don't ALL the fair minded Labour councillors resign the Labour whipand become independent - Tories Lib Dems force a vote of no confidence and the Independents Tories and Lib Dems form a coalition till next year and we can wave bye bye to Jimmy and the other 2 fools.
And the reason why they won't resign is?

Who in the right mind would employ them?

York has become a mess and needs sorting by professional people who understand the needs of the city, its visitors and residents. I completely agree with Dr Brian
I agree illegal actions demand some form of consequence and I'd agree with this method as a form of consequences
[quote][p][bold]Got a life[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dr Brian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Got a life[/bold] wrote: Is it possible that due to the amazingly bad way Merrit and Alexander handled this complete fiasco they can be removed from their positions and an early election forced? If Merrit continues the policy of issuing fines isn't that illegal, as in trying to obtain money under false pretences? For the good of the city these two need to go before close of business today![/p][/quote]Quite easily - we know that Merrtt TSL and The Fuhrer Alexander won't resign, but why don't ALL the fair minded Labour councillors resign the Labour whipand become independent - Tories Lib Dems force a vote of no confidence and the Independents Tories and Lib Dems form a coalition till next year and we can wave bye bye to Jimmy and the other 2 fools.[/p][/quote]And the reason why they won't resign is? Who in the right mind would employ them? York has become a mess and needs sorting by professional people who understand the needs of the city, its visitors and residents. I completely agree with Dr Brian[/p][/quote]I agree illegal actions demand some form of consequence and I'd agree with this method as a form of consequences Silver
  • Score: -93

9:38pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Outsidein says...

This scheme was considered by the ruling Labour Group and the officer Corporate Management Team several times. They were all fully aware of its implementation and the issues involved...so the buck needs to stop there at the highest political and management levels of the organisation, rather than blame others further down.
This scheme was considered by the ruling Labour Group and the officer Corporate Management Team several times. They were all fully aware of its implementation and the issues involved...so the buck needs to stop there at the highest political and management levels of the organisation, rather than blame others further down. Outsidein
  • Score: -56

10:27pm Thu 3 Apr 14

piaggio1 says...

Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.
Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead. piaggio1
  • Score: -34

12:29am Fri 4 Apr 14

Badgers Drift says...

YOUWILLDOASISAY wrote:
The only person being tortured by the Mark-Down Mongrel is the mongrels themselves. Crack on, you must be just so close to a breakdown by now. Woof, Woof.
Like the Labour loons he/she protects, he/she doesn't realise he/she has lost the plot.....

Delusionsal nutjobs, the lot of them !
[quote][p][bold]YOUWILLDOASISAY[/bold] wrote: The only person being tortured by the Mark-Down Mongrel is the mongrels themselves. Crack on, you must be just so close to a breakdown by now. Woof, Woof.[/p][/quote]Like the Labour loons he/she protects, he/she doesn't realise he/she has lost the plot..... Delusionsal nutjobs, the lot of them ! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -23

2:53am Fri 4 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal!

Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced.

Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm"


Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.
Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal! Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced. Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm" Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York. Magicman!
  • Score: -4

7:19am Fri 4 Apr 14

JHardacre says...

piaggio1 wrote:
Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.
Your point would have been far better made had you used something approximating normal English.
[quote][p][bold]piaggio1[/bold] wrote: Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.[/p][/quote]Your point would have been far better made had you used something approximating normal English. JHardacre
  • Score: -73

7:51am Fri 4 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

Magicman! wrote:
Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal!

Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced.

Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm"


Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.
When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they dice not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do a y of the things that you would wish to see, Just before retry king, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade vis the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north.
CoYC is wholly dependant on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal! Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced. Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm" Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.[/p][/quote]When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they dice not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do a y of the things that you would wish to see, Just before retry king, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade vis the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north. CoYC is wholly dependant on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity. pedalling paul
  • Score: 67

7:54am Fri 4 Apr 14

piaggio1 says...

Its not engiisc.it.s yaarkshire.
Its not engiisc.it.s yaarkshire. piaggio1
  • Score: -66

8:18am Fri 4 Apr 14

Mister Matosis says...

What is most astonishing about all of this is summarised by this one sentence from the article:

"Traffic cameras on the bridge and Coppergate are still operating and fines being issued."
What is most astonishing about all of this is summarised by this one sentence from the article: "Traffic cameras on the bridge and Coppergate are still operating and fines being issued." Mister Matosis
  • Score: 4

8:24am Fri 4 Apr 14

Happytoliveinyork says...

Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters??

I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e
very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.
Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters?? I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out. Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: 3

8:25am Fri 4 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Magicman! wrote:
Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal!

Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced.

Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm"


Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.
When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they dice not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do a y of the things that you would wish to see, Just before retry king, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade vis the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north.
CoYC is wholly dependant on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.
That will teach me to try and type on my ipod.........here's the spell checked version on my PC.
When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they did not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do any of the things that you would wish to see, Just before detrunking, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade viz the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north.
CoYC is wholly dependent on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal! Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced. Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm" Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.[/p][/quote]When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they dice not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do a y of the things that you would wish to see, Just before retry king, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade vis the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north. CoYC is wholly dependant on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.[/p][/quote]That will teach me to try and type on my ipod.........here's the spell checked version on my PC. When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they did not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do any of the things that you would wish to see, Just before detrunking, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade viz the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north. CoYC is wholly dependent on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity. pedalling paul
  • Score: -5

8:43am Fri 4 Apr 14

nowthen says...

pedalling paul wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
Magicman! wrote:
Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal!

Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced.

Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm"


Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.
When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they dice not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do a y of the things that you would wish to see, Just before retry king, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade vis the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north.
CoYC is wholly dependant on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.
That will teach me to try and type on my ipod.........here's the spell checked version on my PC.
When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they did not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do any of the things that you would wish to see, Just before detrunking, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade viz the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north.
CoYC is wholly dependent on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.
That's alright for you to say ; you get free rail travel , the rest of us subsidize you when we buy a train ticket , it's cheaper and more convenient to go by car and I'll continue to do so. By the way , keep up the good work , you're doing a fantastic job alienating the cycling community from normal people , thank goodness they all aren't like you.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should be treated as two entirely different schemes. The only reason they got ANPR cameras at the same time is because the council likely got a bulk buy deal! Coppergate has been closed to private vehicles for somewhere in the region of 20 YEARS during the main trading hours of the day... Why don't we cast our minds back to all the articles in The Press when the police would carry out "a sting operation" and issue fines to people using Coppergate illegally, and just the vast amount of people who got fined within a period of 6 hours. Between 3pm and 5pm, you could look or go along Coppergate and look at all the vehicles in a queue waiting to turn into Nessgate, and off that queue buses would only be making up 40% - the other 55% being private vehicles using the road illegally... and the reason those vehicles were there is because the drivers knew there would be no consequences, and no fines. The ANPR cameras get switched on, the fines start rolling in, and as if by magic the amount of illegal traffic along Coppergate is vastly reduced. Lendal bridge is a harder one to call simply because whilst the general principle of the closure is good, the entire operation has been botched from the very outset. Firstly, before any closure was put in place any roads that would have been used as the alternative traffic route should have had road and junction improvements undertaken so as to unlock extra capacity; secondly, serious consideration should have been given to making the A1237 between the A59 and A19 dual carriageway first before any closure (even if that was the only part that was dualled, as it'd be the bit crossing the river); and thirdly the signage should have been given better consideration - face-lit signage never has the same effect as an LED-lit aspect... if you go to Manchester and see the 'No Entry' signs by the rising bollards around the Cross Street and Exchange Square area, you will see the entire pictogram of the No Entry sign is lit by red and white LED's - and the sign stands out a mile, far better than any other type of sign I've seen, and even in bright sunshine (which yes is a bit of a rarity in Manchester, but it does occasionally happen!!)... the signs on Museum Street before the bridge should have been a straightforward 'No Entry' sign with an 'except authorised vehicles' exemption plate, and had the pictogram made up entirely by red and white LED's, along with flashing amber aspects such as those you see on school patrol warning signs. And where Bootham Tower is, the sign that faces the exit from Gillygate should not have been a yellow AA Advisory sign, it should have been "Road Ahead Closed" (red and white) complete with an arrow pointing left and a description plate "Lendal Bridge: 10.30am - 5pm" Also, like it or not, and no matter what mode of transport you use/used and which roads in York you use/used... you cannot fail to notice that private vehicle traffic in York has skyrocketed over the last 15 years or so. The streets in York simply cannot cope with such levels of traffic. The bulk of this traffic needs to be moved away from the historic central core of the city, and out onto roads that can cope with it - this primarily would mean the entire A1237 needs to be dual carriageway with grade-seperated junctions, and consideration should be given to connecting Bishopthorpe Road to the A64 thereby reducing congestion along Fulford Road (even if the connection was only a 'half junction' for traffic heading to or from Malton direction on the A64). And on the pages of this website I have made public my ideas about how junctions of the Inner Ring Road could be improved, including the junction at Clifton Green (which is temporarily part of the IRR for the time being)... I am not aversed to people making journeys by car or van if there is an absolute need because there is no physical way their journeys can be made by any other means - but when it comes to the crunch there is simply too much traffic in central York.[/p][/quote]When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they dice not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do a y of the things that you would wish to see, Just before retry king, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade vis the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north. CoYC is wholly dependant on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.[/p][/quote]That will teach me to try and type on my ipod.........here's the spell checked version on my PC. When CoYC inherited the A1237 from the Highways Agency, they did not also inherit a big slice of the HA budget to do any of the things that you would wish to see, Just before detrunking, the HA was persuade to make one modest upgrade viz the cycle/pedestrian underpass near Rawcliffe Bar, That has redressed the severance effect upon Skelton and other communities to the north. CoYC is wholly dependent on external funding for any further changes, Govt. grants are dealing with roundabout capacity which are the true pinch points. But the £150 million bill for your shopping list will remain a pipe dream , even if Leeds City Region funding becomes available. Far better to invest that in extending W. Yorks Metro travel conditions to York and boosting rail capacity.[/p][/quote]That's alright for you to say ; you get free rail travel , the rest of us subsidize you when we buy a train ticket , it's cheaper and more convenient to go by car and I'll continue to do so. By the way , keep up the good work , you're doing a fantastic job alienating the cycling community from normal people , thank goodness they all aren't like you. nowthen
  • Score: 3

9:29am Fri 4 Apr 14

sonorbloke says...

sambo1943 wrote:
And what about the 20mph limits the village idiots imposed on Acomb ?could this be illegal as well ? hope so !!
If I recall correctly the police said at the time that they wouldn't and couldn't enforce these, in line with just about every other 20mph limit in the country.
[quote][p][bold]sambo1943[/bold] wrote: And what about the 20mph limits the village idiots imposed on Acomb ?could this be illegal as well ? hope so !![/p][/quote]If I recall correctly the police said at the time that they wouldn't and couldn't enforce these, in line with just about every other 20mph limit in the country. sonorbloke
  • Score: 3

9:39am Fri 4 Apr 14

Dr Brian says...

Happytoliveinyork wrote:
Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters??

I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e

very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.
I too have never voted anything but Labour - I wont vote Labour at the next Council elections (I might consider voting for them if Jimmy no mates the Ferrett and the bubble head TSL resign) I won't vote Tory or the pot hole of the week champions the Lib Dems but will turn to Green or an independent

James you are making Labour voters turn their backs on the party just go
[quote][p][bold]Happytoliveinyork[/bold] wrote: Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters?? I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.[/p][/quote]I too have never voted anything but Labour - I wont vote Labour at the next Council elections (I might consider voting for them if Jimmy no mates the Ferrett and the bubble head TSL resign) I won't vote Tory or the pot hole of the week champions the Lib Dems but will turn to Green or an independent James you are making Labour voters turn their backs on the party just go Dr Brian
  • Score: 6

11:02am Fri 4 Apr 14

Paul Hepworth says...

piaggio1 wrote:
Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.
Decided to join the debate at last.......the unfortunate attitude of this contributor who cares not for future generations, will unfortunately create the future ills that CoYC is trying to avoid. And it's not just York's problem. No City in the world has successfully come to terms with mass car ownership and use. Even the one oil-rich Arabs are building light rail rapid transit and even an air conditioned cycle route!!
Unless many residents broaden their local travel choices, instead of using a car as their default option, we will continue to be menaced by the threat of gridlock. I recall a pedestrian rtc in suburban Leeds some years ago. Within an hour, tailbacks had reached the City centre, the evening peak descended and just about every vehicle in the centre was static. I was returning by a rail substitute bus service to York, and we ended up leaving on the A58 and navigating back to the A64 out in the sticks. I wouldn't wish that for my own City's descendants.
[quote][p][bold]piaggio1[/bold] wrote: Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.[/p][/quote]Decided to join the debate at last.......the unfortunate attitude of this contributor who cares not for future generations, will unfortunately create the future ills that CoYC is trying to avoid. And it's not just York's problem. No City in the world has successfully come to terms with mass car ownership and use. Even the one oil-rich Arabs are building light rail rapid transit and even an air conditioned cycle route!! Unless many residents broaden their local travel choices, instead of using a car as their default option, we will continue to be menaced by the threat of gridlock. I recall a pedestrian rtc in suburban Leeds some years ago. Within an hour, tailbacks had reached the City centre, the evening peak descended and just about every vehicle in the centre was static. I was returning by a rail substitute bus service to York, and we ended up leaving on the A58 and navigating back to the A64 out in the sticks. I wouldn't wish that for my own City's descendants. Paul Hepworth
  • Score: -4

11:33am Fri 4 Apr 14

andy fowler says...

The negative scores show just how far the bias towards Alexander is at the Press.
The negative scores show just how far the bias towards Alexander is at the Press. andy fowler
  • Score: 2

12:25pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Cheeky face says...

Good responses from Dr Brian, Magicman, and Paul Hepworth. Now you may understand why I left York in 1995. Scarborough bus lanes; and restricted areas meet the principles of the Road signs regs of 2002 and the Traffic manual of 2008!

A shame the adjudicator was not able to help me with general complaints, like those he crucified on recently when I made contact
in Dec. The reason was I had NOT received a PCN..

To-day's decision on the council's legal advice is awaited with interest!

My repeated complaints were sent to James Alexander mid Feb; and despite a code of conduct for a 5 day response I still wait!

If the council paid employees only what they truly deserved then the money saved would have negated the need for a c/tax rise!
Good responses from Dr Brian, Magicman, and Paul Hepworth. Now you may understand why I left York in 1995. Scarborough bus lanes; and restricted areas meet the principles of the Road signs regs of 2002 and the Traffic manual of 2008! A shame the adjudicator was not able to help me with general complaints, like those he crucified on recently when I made contact in Dec. The reason was I had NOT received a PCN.. To-day's decision on the council's legal advice is awaited with interest! My repeated complaints were sent to James Alexander mid Feb; and despite a code of conduct for a 5 day response I still wait! If the council paid employees only what they truly deserved then the money saved would have negated the need for a c/tax rise! Cheeky face
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Fri 4 Apr 14

bolero says...

Cheeky face wrote:
Good responses from Dr Brian, Magicman, and Paul Hepworth. Now you may understand why I left York in 1995. Scarborough bus lanes; and restricted areas meet the principles of the Road signs regs of 2002 and the Traffic manual of 2008!

A shame the adjudicator was not able to help me with general complaints, like those he crucified on recently when I made contact
in Dec. The reason was I had NOT received a PCN..

To-day's decision on the council's legal advice is awaited with interest!

My repeated complaints were sent to James Alexander mid Feb; and despite a code of conduct for a 5 day response I still wait!

If the council paid employees only what they truly deserved then the money saved would have negated the need for a c/tax rise!
Where do you live then? York or Scarborough? If it's Scarborough, how does York Council Tax affect you?
[quote][p][bold]Cheeky face[/bold] wrote: Good responses from Dr Brian, Magicman, and Paul Hepworth. Now you may understand why I left York in 1995. Scarborough bus lanes; and restricted areas meet the principles of the Road signs regs of 2002 and the Traffic manual of 2008! A shame the adjudicator was not able to help me with general complaints, like those he crucified on recently when I made contact in Dec. The reason was I had NOT received a PCN.. To-day's decision on the council's legal advice is awaited with interest! My repeated complaints were sent to James Alexander mid Feb; and despite a code of conduct for a 5 day response I still wait! If the council paid employees only what they truly deserved then the money saved would have negated the need for a c/tax rise![/p][/quote]Where do you live then? York or Scarborough? If it's Scarborough, how does York Council Tax affect you? bolero
  • Score: 1

12:58pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

Dr Brian wrote:
Happytoliveinyork wrote:
Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters??

I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e


very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.
I too have never voted anything but Labour - I wont vote Labour at the next Council elections (I might consider voting for them if Jimmy no mates the Ferrett and the bubble head TSL resign) I won't vote Tory or the pot hole of the week champions the Lib Dems but will turn to Green or an independent

James you are making Labour voters turn their backs on the party just go
You'll vote Green even though they would probably make every bridge in York a bus lane with priority for cycles?
[quote][p][bold]Dr Brian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Happytoliveinyork[/bold] wrote: Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters?? I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.[/p][/quote]I too have never voted anything but Labour - I wont vote Labour at the next Council elections (I might consider voting for them if Jimmy no mates the Ferrett and the bubble head TSL resign) I won't vote Tory or the pot hole of the week champions the Lib Dems but will turn to Green or an independent James you are making Labour voters turn their backs on the party just go[/p][/quote]You'll vote Green even though they would probably make every bridge in York a bus lane with priority for cycles? Pinza-C55
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Fri 4 Apr 14

zorpie says...

James Alexander should resign in disgrace.
James Alexander should resign in disgrace. zorpie
  • Score: 4

4:27pm Fri 4 Apr 14

meme says...

But in response to P Hepworth car use in York has remained virtually static in10 years! see DOT's own figures so the doom-mongers who say cars are causing all York's issues are exaggerating for their own ends
I am as environmentally conscious as most and appreciate the need to do our best but ramming stuff down peoples throats through dodgy stats etc is counter productive
To make a scheme a success you need support and CoYC seem incapable of bringing the populace with them and insist on an antagonistic approach.
I don't object to the closure in principle but I object to the way its been carried out and the supposed 'trial' nature etc so consequently I end up being one of the people severely angry at the Councils attitude when potentially I am a supporter of this plan...The Council need to learn that without the backing of their voters they are stuffed!
But in response to P Hepworth car use in York has remained virtually static in10 years! see DOT's own figures so the doom-mongers who say cars are causing all York's issues are exaggerating for their own ends I am as environmentally conscious as most and appreciate the need to do our best but ramming stuff down peoples throats through dodgy stats etc is counter productive To make a scheme a success you need support and CoYC seem incapable of bringing the populace with them and insist on an antagonistic approach. I don't object to the closure in principle but I object to the way its been carried out and the supposed 'trial' nature etc so consequently I end up being one of the people severely angry at the Councils attitude when potentially I am a supporter of this plan...The Council need to learn that without the backing of their voters they are stuffed! meme
  • Score: 0

5:42pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Dr Brian says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
Dr Brian wrote:
Happytoliveinyork wrote:
Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters??

I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e



very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.
I too have never voted anything but Labour - I wont vote Labour at the next Council elections (I might consider voting for them if Jimmy no mates the Ferrett and the bubble head TSL resign) I won't vote Tory or the pot hole of the week champions the Lib Dems but will turn to Green or an independent

James you are making Labour voters turn their backs on the party just go
You'll vote Green even though they would probably make every bridge in York a bus lane with priority for cycles?
It will be a protest vote because the green party will not win in my ward
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dr Brian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Happytoliveinyork[/bold] wrote: Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters?? I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.[/p][/quote]I too have never voted anything but Labour - I wont vote Labour at the next Council elections (I might consider voting for them if Jimmy no mates the Ferrett and the bubble head TSL resign) I won't vote Tory or the pot hole of the week champions the Lib Dems but will turn to Green or an independent James you are making Labour voters turn their backs on the party just go[/p][/quote]You'll vote Green even though they would probably make every bridge in York a bus lane with priority for cycles?[/p][/quote]It will be a protest vote because the green party will not win in my ward Dr Brian
  • Score: 0

11:35pm Fri 4 Apr 14

wallman says...

Bailed Out wrote:
Repayments without delay for the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate. Plus a payment for the distress caused.
how much will your council tax bill go up baied out that's if you pay it
[quote][p][bold]Bailed Out[/bold] wrote: Repayments without delay for the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate. Plus a payment for the distress caused.[/p][/quote]how much will your council tax bill go up baied out that's if you pay it wallman
  • Score: 0

11:38pm Fri 4 Apr 14

wallman says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Archiebold the 1st wrote:
So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up.

So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on.

Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport!

Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road.

So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.
Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination.
If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car.
The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.
long car pp shame you came back
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: So come on Paul, let the comment of lets await for the legal findings. If the best traffic lawyer in the country and an independent expert say its illegal.... it is! They can hire lawyers at our cost to try see if there is a loop hole but if the loop hole lawyer has urged residents to compose a letter requesting a refund then the game is up. So as you advise of all this cycle related to the city, how this has helped us? traffic was worse in other areas of the city centre (so no reduction in city centre congestion or pollution) and its going to cost us; around 600-800k implementation to date say 100k legal advise and internal reports, compensation on the fines issued say £265k (based on £5 per fine) admin and postal costs associated with that at around 100k (maybe more). So around 1.2-1.3m in total...500k for 20 is plenty if you want to add that on. Why do you insist on cycle paths? We do not want a car driver’s paradise! Just an inner ring road. You are more then welcome to share our roads but planning traffic schemes like this (i could name a fair few more millions wasted) is not the future of transport! Imagine you could build a rail link from tesco askern bar to york city centre (new station were the new p&r is going to be) and simply run a service once an hour along there. I'm sure capacity of the railway would allow this. Maybe this would be greener as people could commute via the a64 park up. Pay £3 and travel to the centre come sun, rain & snow.. This would also be viable for shoppers... It would in fact take busses and cars off the road. So instead of being blinkered around cycling why do we not plan for the future? Which sure as hell isn’t peddling everywhere.[/p][/quote]Whatever gave you the impression that I pedal everywhere.? I made a long car journey recently to visit distant relatives. I'm currently travelling on a train to York & will cycle home from the station. I have a frequent bus service from my York suburb and the bike ride is less than half an hour. So you see, I mix my travel choices according to the nature of my journey.The bike is my preferred choice to & from York. By using it I remain healthier, it's cheap and I can get closer to my final destination. If lots of other suburban residents did likewise, there would be more road capacity for those who need, rather than want to use a car. The only alternative when future gridlock strikes, is a congestion charge.[/p][/quote]long car pp shame you came back wallman
  • Score: 0

11:41pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Thunderblade says...

We don't have to get rid of all the Labour Councillors at the next election, just enough to stop an overall majority.
If memory serves my correctly I believe this happened a few elections back when my ward went over to the LibDems with a very small majority. Incidentally its the ward Little Jimmy is a member for now.
We don't have to get rid of all the Labour Councillors at the next election, just enough to stop an overall majority. If memory serves my correctly I believe this happened a few elections back when my ward went over to the LibDems with a very small majority. Incidentally its the ward Little Jimmy is a member for now. Thunderblade
  • Score: 1

11:44pm Fri 4 Apr 14

wallman says...

Paul Hepworth wrote:
piaggio1 wrote:
Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.
Decided to join the debate at last.......the unfortunate attitude of this contributor who cares not for future generations, will unfortunately create the future ills that CoYC is trying to avoid. And it's not just York's problem. No City in the world has successfully come to terms with mass car ownership and use. Even the one oil-rich Arabs are building light rail rapid transit and even an air conditioned cycle route!!
Unless many residents broaden their local travel choices, instead of using a car as their default option, we will continue to be menaced by the threat of gridlock. I recall a pedestrian rtc in suburban Leeds some years ago. Within an hour, tailbacks had reached the City centre, the evening peak descended and just about every vehicle in the centre was static. I was returning by a rail substitute bus service to York, and we ended up leaving on the A58 and navigating back to the A64 out in the sticks. I wouldn't wish that for my own City's descendants.
air conditioned cycle route? what har that to do with YORK u muppet pp
[quote][p][bold]Paul Hepworth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]piaggio1[/bold] wrote: Oh yes.the free rail travel card.a remnant from good old british rail .should have bin cancelled when it all got sold of .I would love to do all my travels by train. But cant afford the price.nor can many of us.Thats why we use a car.and if it contribute. S to your favourite word GRIDLOCK......I could.nt give a s**t.and as for future generations. ..........deal with it.not my problem..I.ll be well dead.[/p][/quote]Decided to join the debate at last.......the unfortunate attitude of this contributor who cares not for future generations, will unfortunately create the future ills that CoYC is trying to avoid. And it's not just York's problem. No City in the world has successfully come to terms with mass car ownership and use. Even the one oil-rich Arabs are building light rail rapid transit and even an air conditioned cycle route!! Unless many residents broaden their local travel choices, instead of using a car as their default option, we will continue to be menaced by the threat of gridlock. I recall a pedestrian rtc in suburban Leeds some years ago. Within an hour, tailbacks had reached the City centre, the evening peak descended and just about every vehicle in the centre was static. I was returning by a rail substitute bus service to York, and we ended up leaving on the A58 and navigating back to the A64 out in the sticks. I wouldn't wish that for my own City's descendants.[/p][/quote]air conditioned cycle route? what har that to do with YORK u muppet pp wallman
  • Score: 0

3:21pm Mon 7 Apr 14

the equalizer squad says...

https://www.dropbox.
com/sh/ptonllw1i7i9u
m7/X0UbyQqaXK/York_P
CN_Refund.doc


Claim your fine back form.
https://www.dropbox. com/sh/ptonllw1i7i9u m7/X0UbyQqaXK/York_P CN_Refund.doc Claim your fine back form. the equalizer squad
  • Score: 1

6:34pm Tue 8 Apr 14

deckhanddave says...

is it me but does this council seem either inept or corrupt? Forced projects the majority don't want, missing funds, working closely with private companies, squandered money on wasted schemes. Do they get backhanders? are they just too stupid to see how it looks? Or maybe just so up their own ***** to listen to anyone.
is it me but does this council seem either inept or corrupt? Forced projects the majority don't want, missing funds, working closely with private companies, squandered money on wasted schemes. Do they get backhanders? are they just too stupid to see how it looks? Or maybe just so up their own ***** to listen to anyone. deckhanddave
  • 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