Lendal Bridge scheme is lawful, legal teams tell council

Lendal Bridge scheme is lawful, legal teams tell council

Lendal Bridge scheme is lawful, legal teams tell council

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

CITY leaders say legal experts have today told them the controversial Lendal Bridge and Coppergate traffic schemes ARE lawful.

A Government traffic adjudicator's judgement this week said City of York Council had no power to issue fines to tens of thousands of motorists through the schemes, leading the authority to seek independent legal advice. The council has now hinted it may appeal against this judgement, although this has yet to be confirmed.

In a statement released this afternoon, the council's chief executive Kersten England said: “Having received independent legal advice from a leading legal expert in this field, we are confident we are operating both Lendal Bridge and Coppergate schemes within the law.

“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

The traffic restrictions will remain in place on both Lendal Bridge and Coppergate and the council has urged drivers to obey them, although it has not explicitly said whether fines are still being issued. The content of the legal advice provided to the council has not been published, and the authority will now consider this advice when making decisions on the future of the traffic schemes.

Following Ms England's statement, Coun Dave Merrett - the Labour council's cabinet member for transport, who has faced calls to resign in the wake of Mr Knapp's judgement - said: "We're obviously pleased the legal advice the council has received supports the advice we have previously received in relation to traffic restrictions on Lendal Bridge and in Coppergate."

Traffic adjudicator Stephen Knapp's judgement, which emerged on Tuesday as he upheld an appeal against a Coppergate fine, said neither Lendal Bridge nor Coppergate could "sensibly" be classed as bus lanes, and that while the council could introduce restrictions, it did not have the power to fine motorists. He also criticised warning signs for both schemes and the council's approach to dealing with appeals.

Leading traffic lawyer Nick Freeman, known as Mr Loophole for his success in defending celebrity clients, has since urged drivers who have paid fines since the schemes were introduced to write to the council requesting a refund.

The six-month Lendal Bridge trial ended on February 27 but the restrictions have remained ahead of a meeting of the council's Labour cabinet on May 6, when a decision will be taken on whether to continue, extend or abandon the experiment. More than 53,000 penalty charge notices (PCNs) were issued during the official trial period, with almost 10,000 handed out for breaching the Coppergate rules between the end of September and the end of February.

The penalties from both schemes combined have led to about £1.7 million of income to the council, of which about £700,000 is expected to be ringfenced for roads and transport schemes once costs are deducted.

Council leader James Alexander has ordered an internal review of the schemes, saying the way they have been implemented is not good enough.

Following today's council statement, Conservative group leader Coun Chris Steward said: "The shortness of the statement and, once again, an officer being left to carry the can says it all about this debacle.

"It looks like the council is now set to press ahead and involve York’s taxpayers in further potentially high legal costs. However, they really should realise it is not about some legal technicalities where they may be right or wrong - the handling of Lendal Bridge and Coppergate has been a farce and that is what must be addressed."

Liberal Democrat group leader Keith Aspden said he would ask Ms England to publish a full copy of the legal advice the council received and he also wanted to know how much it had cost. He said: “To continue with a policy which the Government’s traffic adjudicator has ruled is unlawful seems like a gamble, which is why residents need to see the advice the decision is based on.

“The closure has been a shambles from the beginning and Labour need to stop dithering and make a final decision on the future of Lendal Bridge. We think the enforcement cameras should be turned off immediately and Lendal Bridge reopened. Labour need to stop hiding behind council officers and actually say what they are going to do.”

Susie Cawood, head of York and North Yorkshire Chamber of Commerce, said: "While the legal implications of the Lendal Bridge trial are important, we should not forget that the closure of this bridge is damaging to business and the Chamber would urge the council to stop this trial immediately.

"Businesses create the wealth in the economy and provide jobs. They have to be allowed to trade, and this transport strategy is hindering economic growth.

In 2009, the Traffic Penalty Tribunal ruled Oxford Council should not be penalising drivers for entering a city-centre "bus lane" because the area had not been signposted as such. The council's High Court appeal was upheld and it was allowed to continue fining drivers £60 for entering an area prohibited to motor vehicles. However, the judge who heard the appeal also conceded some of the signs were "misleading" as they implied the ban applied at all times, rather than between 7.30am and 6.30pm.

 

 

Comments (87)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:01pm Fri 4 Apr 14

The Great Buda says...

Well done, its legal.

However the trial is over: open the bridge.
Well done, its legal. However the trial is over: open the bridge. The Great Buda
  • Score: -68

2:04pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Fat Harry says...

Brilliant, a lengthy court battle.

Everyone needs to get excercising their bulging neck veins, and salivary glands to keep up with the best mouth-frothers in the business.
Brilliant, a lengthy court battle. Everyone needs to get excercising their bulging neck veins, and salivary glands to keep up with the best mouth-frothers in the business. Fat Harry
  • Score: -13

2:07pm Fri 4 Apr 14

ouseswimmer says...

This is a story set to continue. The government say it's illegal and some backstreet lawyer say it's legal and fine. I guess millions will now be spent in legal fees and before long local residents will need to pay higher rates!
This is a story set to continue. The government say it's illegal and some backstreet lawyer say it's legal and fine. I guess millions will now be spent in legal fees and before long local residents will need to pay higher rates! ouseswimmer
  • Score: 27

2:08pm Fri 4 Apr 14

York2000 says...

The Press has actually become a local Daily Mail. It's happened. The standard of reporting is awful.
The Press has actually become a local Daily Mail. It's happened. The standard of reporting is awful. York2000
  • Score: -38

2:09pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Knavesmire view says...

The lawyers were hardly going to say, "of course it's illegal and you have no chance of contesting this. Save your money and don't bother paying us for a long and lengthy legal case" now were they?

This is going to run and run.

If they lose this case/appeal then they really do need to resign.

Does this mean the internal review is on hold now that everything is apparently hunky dory again now?
The lawyers were hardly going to say, "of course it's illegal and you have no chance of contesting this. Save your money and don't bother paying us for a long and lengthy legal case" now were they? This is going to run and run. If they lose this case/appeal then they really do need to resign. Does this mean the internal review is on hold now that everything is apparently hunky dory again now? Knavesmire view
  • Score: 17

2:10pm Fri 4 Apr 14

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

And my legal team told me that it was lawful to shoot a Scotts man from the bar walls if he was trying to enter the city.
But that doesn't make it right.
And my legal team told me that it was lawful to shoot a Scotts man from the bar walls if he was trying to enter the city. But that doesn't make it right. NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: 25

2:12pm Fri 4 Apr 14

asd says...

Ohh dear i see more expense, I can only see independent legal people seeing a nice money earner similar to YCC cash cow from the bridge and coppergate. This does not bode well at all for the citizens of York.
Ohh dear i see more expense, I can only see independent legal people seeing a nice money earner similar to YCC cash cow from the bridge and coppergate. This does not bode well at all for the citizens of York. asd
  • Score: 9

2:12pm Fri 4 Apr 14

P3TER1 says...

York2000 wrote:
The Press has actually become a local Daily Mail. It's happened. The standard of reporting is awful.
This has been evident for some time now!
[quote][p][bold]York2000[/bold] wrote: The Press has actually become a local Daily Mail. It's happened. The standard of reporting is awful.[/p][/quote]This has been evident for some time now! P3TER1
  • Score: -10

2:13pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Fat Harry says...

ouseswimmer wrote:
This is a story set to continue. The government say it's illegal and some backstreet lawyer say it's legal and fine. I guess millions will now be spent in legal fees and before long local residents will need to pay higher rates!
In fairness I doubt it's "some backstreet lawyer".

As for the government, if they don't like the outcome of a legal case, they'll simply change the law, like they did when they got caught breaking the law to close hospitals.
[quote][p][bold]ouseswimmer[/bold] wrote: This is a story set to continue. The government say it's illegal and some backstreet lawyer say it's legal and fine. I guess millions will now be spent in legal fees and before long local residents will need to pay higher rates![/p][/quote]In fairness I doubt it's "some backstreet lawyer". As for the government, if they don't like the outcome of a legal case, they'll simply change the law, like they did when they got caught breaking the law to close hospitals. Fat Harry
  • Score: -5

2:29pm Fri 4 Apr 14

the original Homer says...

The Council finding a legal expert who agreed with them was entirely predictable, but that doesn't make them right.
The situation for now is that appeals against PCNs will be considered in the light of the adjudicator's decision, and will therefore succeed.
Whether the Council can get the adjudicator's decision overturned is debatable, but until they do any tickets they issue are worthless.
I don't know the details of the Oxford case, and a lot would seem to hinge upon the similarities with their categories of restrictions/excepti
ons.
My money says the Council will lose this one, but only after wasting even more money flogging a dead horse.
Wonder how much they have on Shergar for tomorrow?
The Council finding a legal expert who agreed with them was entirely predictable, but that doesn't make them right. The situation for now is that appeals against PCNs will be considered in the light of the adjudicator's decision, and will therefore succeed. Whether the Council can get the adjudicator's decision overturned is debatable, but until they do any tickets they issue are worthless. I don't know the details of the Oxford case, and a lot would seem to hinge upon the similarities with their categories of restrictions/excepti ons. My money says the Council will lose this one, but only after wasting even more money flogging a dead horse. Wonder how much they have on Shergar for tomorrow? the original Homer
  • Score: 37

2:34pm Fri 4 Apr 14

York2000 says...

@P3TER1

The Press just like to wind people up and drive traffic to their website. It feels like there's a group of people constantly checking the stories to comment as much as possible. It's out of hand. Polluting our local paper.
@P3TER1 The Press just like to wind people up and drive traffic to their website. It feels like there's a group of people constantly checking the stories to comment as much as possible. It's out of hand. Polluting our local paper. York2000
  • Score: -20

2:34pm Fri 4 Apr 14

purpletimbo says...

An un-named legal expert, in an unpublished inaccessible document says the scheme is legal, so did the Adjudicator, He said the use of cameras to issue PCNs is illegal, not the scheme, so what's new then?
An un-named legal expert, in an unpublished inaccessible document says the scheme is legal, so did the Adjudicator, He said the use of cameras to issue PCNs is illegal, not the scheme, so what's new then? purpletimbo
  • Score: 13

2:40pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Pitbull Terry says...

Legal or not the scheme is ridiculous, dreamt up by this labour council. Roll on next year when they'll be gone. THE VOTERS WONT FORGET, I ASSURE YOU!
Legal or not the scheme is ridiculous, dreamt up by this labour council. Roll on next year when they'll be gone. THE VOTERS WONT FORGET, I ASSURE YOU! Pitbull Terry
  • Score: 11

2:41pm Fri 4 Apr 14

the original Homer says...

Just read up on the Oxford case.
That was about a "bus gate" on the high street, which an adjudicator had said was not a "bus lane" and the High Court over-ruled him.
The issue was whether a short (15 metre) stretch could be a bus lane, and the court ruled that, since the only permitted traffic was buses, then it was a bus lane albeit a very short one.
This sets no precedent for York's case, as the adjudicator said it was the sheer number of exempted classifications of vehicles that stopped them being bus lanes.
The law is clear that Cameras and Councils can issue fines for bus lanes, that isn't in dispute.
What is in dispute is if York's are bus lanes or not. The adjudicator says they aren't, and for a totally different reason to Oxford.
The adjudicator will no doubt have been aware of the Oxford case, and has decided this isn't the same.
Just read up on the Oxford case. That was about a "bus gate" on the high street, which an adjudicator had said was not a "bus lane" and the High Court over-ruled him. The issue was whether a short (15 metre) stretch could be a bus lane, and the court ruled that, since the only permitted traffic was buses, then it was a bus lane albeit a very short one. This sets no precedent for York's case, as the adjudicator said it was the sheer number of exempted classifications of vehicles that stopped them being bus lanes. The law is clear that Cameras and Councils can issue fines for bus lanes, that isn't in dispute. What is in dispute is if York's are bus lanes or not. The adjudicator says they aren't, and for a totally different reason to Oxford. The adjudicator will no doubt have been aware of the Oxford case, and has decided this isn't the same. the original Homer
  • Score: 17

2:43pm Fri 4 Apr 14

The Great Buda says...

purpletimbo wrote:
An un-named legal expert, in an unpublished inaccessible document says the scheme is legal, so did the Adjudicator, He said the use of cameras to issue PCNs is illegal, not the scheme, so what's new then?
Interesting point there.

The statement from the council says "Lendal Bridge and Coppergate schemes (are) within the law."

The statement does not say "Its legal for us to issue PCN fines".

A very big difference.
[quote][p][bold]purpletimbo[/bold] wrote: An un-named legal expert, in an unpublished inaccessible document says the scheme is legal, so did the Adjudicator, He said the use of cameras to issue PCNs is illegal, not the scheme, so what's new then?[/p][/quote]Interesting point there. The statement from the council says "Lendal Bridge and Coppergate schemes (are) within the law." The statement does not say "Its legal for us to issue PCN fines". A very big difference. The Great Buda
  • Score: 11

2:45pm Fri 4 Apr 14

the original Homer says...

ouseswimmer wrote:
This is a story set to continue. The government say it's illegal and some backstreet lawyer say it's legal and fine. I guess millions will now be spent in legal fees and before long local residents will need to pay higher rates!
Off topic, but I think it might be a good idea to think again about your username.
Absolutely no offence intended, but I suspect it now has connotations it didn't have when you chose it.
[quote][p][bold]ouseswimmer[/bold] wrote: This is a story set to continue. The government say it's illegal and some backstreet lawyer say it's legal and fine. I guess millions will now be spent in legal fees and before long local residents will need to pay higher rates![/p][/quote]Off topic, but I think it might be a good idea to think again about your username. Absolutely no offence intended, but I suspect it now has connotations it didn't have when you chose it. the original Homer
  • Score: -16

2:49pm Fri 4 Apr 14

SuperChris says...

I think the Press should be reporting this from an impartial stand point but that doesn't seem to come across - clearly they are bias and that shows very poor reporting standards
I think the Press should be reporting this from an impartial stand point but that doesn't seem to come across - clearly they are bias and that shows very poor reporting standards SuperChris
  • Score: -23

3:08pm Fri 4 Apr 14

courier46 says...

Are these muppets paying the legal fees themselves?,for christs sake end this farce now!.We all know politicians are ignorant but this lot go to a different level.
Are these muppets paying the legal fees themselves?,for christs sake end this farce now!.We all know politicians are ignorant but this lot go to a different level. courier46
  • Score: 7

3:16pm Fri 4 Apr 14

TheMinsterMen says...

“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling. TheMinsterMen
  • Score: 15

3:21pm Fri 4 Apr 14

strangebuttrue? says...

Yes I sense yet another bit of misleading here from our council by saying the scheme is legal but not mentioning if the fines are legal.

It is disgraceful the man in charge Mr Merrett (has he left the country?) is leaving it to council officers to make announcements. Still they do say sewage flows down hill.

You are bound found a layer who says it is legal and is willing to fight your cause but that will be for a fee. They do this for criminals who eventually get convicted but it does not reduce the amount the solicitor gets.

More worrying on two levels in the statement is it says the advice they now have, which appears to conflict with that of the adjudicator, will be used when considering future traffic schemes. Well in the first place they do not know if this is legal yet and in the second what else are they planning?
Yes I sense yet another bit of misleading here from our council by saying the scheme is legal but not mentioning if the fines are legal. It is disgraceful the man in charge Mr Merrett (has he left the country?) is leaving it to council officers to make announcements. Still they do say sewage flows down hill. You are bound found a layer who says it is legal and is willing to fight your cause but that will be for a fee. They do this for criminals who eventually get convicted but it does not reduce the amount the solicitor gets. More worrying on two levels in the statement is it says the advice they now have, which appears to conflict with that of the adjudicator, will be used when considering future traffic schemes. Well in the first place they do not know if this is legal yet and in the second what else are they planning? strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 12

3:24pm Fri 4 Apr 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

purpletimbo wrote:
An un-named legal expert, in an unpublished inaccessible document says the scheme is legal, so did the Adjudicator, He said the use of cameras to issue PCNs is illegal, not the scheme, so what's new then?
Kersten England said: “Having received independent legal advice from a leading legal expert in this field, we are confident we are operating both Lendal Bridge and Coppergate schemes within the law.

This matter is not going to go away, what are we not being told by Kersten England. How much money is going to be committed to defend a policy that is fundamentally a failure for the majority of York and will be reversed post the next local elections.

Let's see how silly this can get and even more to the point how much money can be spent on something that will without question be recinded after May 2015. The restriction of Lendal Bridge will not be a legacy project from Labour that has already been stated by the opposition parties and for all the same reasons the majority of the electorate (75% +) are rejecting it.

Purpletimbo sums it up perfectly, and the question raised by him/her needs to be abslutely clarified, is it legal to issue PCN's via the ANPR cameras?.
[quote][p][bold]purpletimbo[/bold] wrote: An un-named legal expert, in an unpublished inaccessible document says the scheme is legal, so did the Adjudicator, He said the use of cameras to issue PCNs is illegal, not the scheme, so what's new then?[/p][/quote]Kersten England said: “Having received independent legal advice from a leading legal expert in this field, we are confident we are operating both Lendal Bridge and Coppergate schemes within the law. This matter is not going to go away, what are we not being told by Kersten England. How much money is going to be committed to defend a policy that is fundamentally a failure for the majority of York and will be reversed post the next local elections. Let's see how silly this can get and even more to the point how much money can be spent on something that will without question be recinded after May 2015. The restriction of Lendal Bridge will not be a legacy project from Labour that has already been stated by the opposition parties and for all the same reasons the majority of the electorate (75% +) are rejecting it. Purpletimbo sums it up perfectly, and the question raised by him/her needs to be abslutely clarified, is it legal to issue PCN's via the ANPR cameras?. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -2

3:44pm Fri 4 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
[quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars. pedalling paul
  • Score: 23

3:47pm Fri 4 Apr 14

chelk says...

I suppose these Legal Experts are looking for other avenues to make money now that Legal Aid is being cut back. Would like to know the whole story not just what Kersten England wants to allow us to be told.
I suppose these Legal Experts are looking for other avenues to make money now that Legal Aid is being cut back. Would like to know the whole story not just what Kersten England wants to allow us to be told. chelk
  • Score: -51

3:48pm Fri 4 Apr 14

bolero says...

Let's see the legal advice given the Council and how much has it cost. And how much will it cost to appeal the Adjudicator's decision. Or is this yet another case of the council being economical with the truth? Not that we don't trust you mind, but......
Let's see the legal advice given the Council and how much has it cost. And how much will it cost to appeal the Adjudicator's decision. Or is this yet another case of the council being economical with the truth? Not that we don't trust you mind, but...... bolero
  • Score: -15

3:48pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Justin7 says...

Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it.

It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings!
Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it. It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings! Justin7
  • Score: -62

4:17pm Fri 4 Apr 14

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...

Justin7 wrote:
Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it.

It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings!
We could get Leonard Nimoy to open it for us.
[quote][p][bold]Justin7[/bold] wrote: Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it. It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings![/p][/quote]We could get Leonard Nimoy to open it for us. NoNewsIsGoodNews
  • Score: -41

4:17pm Fri 4 Apr 14

BioLogic says...

pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them. BioLogic
  • Score: -1

4:23pm Fri 4 Apr 14

TICKLETREVOR says...

At least it will keep all the pen pushers and paper shufflers at the council in work for a while longer!
At least it will keep all the pen pushers and paper shufflers at the council in work for a while longer! TICKLETREVOR
  • Score: -35

4:25pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Diogenes2 says...

Knavesmire view wrote:
The lawyers were hardly going to say, "of course it's illegal and you have no chance of contesting this. Save your money and don't bother paying us for a long and lengthy legal case" now were they?

This is going to run and run.

If they lose this case/appeal then they really do need to resign.

Does this mean the internal review is on hold now that everything is apparently hunky dory again now?
Yes. this wrangle will run and run.
Meanwhile, the solicitors will argue with solicitors (the prefer to be called "lawyers" as the name solicitors leaves a nasty taste in many peoples' mouths.
During the meantime, legal fees will mount and mount, leaving the taxpayers of York with a massive tax bill which will take decades to clear, with the interest principal not moving.
Oh, yes, don't let your eyes off the ball in case the current cabal, with High Priest Alexander, passes another white elephant for the people of York to carry the bill.
[quote][p][bold]Knavesmire view[/bold] wrote: The lawyers were hardly going to say, "of course it's illegal and you have no chance of contesting this. Save your money and don't bother paying us for a long and lengthy legal case" now were they? This is going to run and run. If they lose this case/appeal then they really do need to resign. Does this mean the internal review is on hold now that everything is apparently hunky dory again now?[/p][/quote]Yes. this wrangle will run and run. Meanwhile, the solicitors will argue with solicitors (the prefer to be called "lawyers" as the name solicitors leaves a nasty taste in many peoples' mouths. During the meantime, legal fees will mount and mount, leaving the taxpayers of York with a massive tax bill which will take decades to clear, with the interest principal not moving. Oh, yes, don't let your eyes off the ball in case the current cabal, with High Priest Alexander, passes another white elephant for the people of York to carry the bill. Diogenes2
  • Score: -8

4:36pm Fri 4 Apr 14

eeoodares says...

pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
Where as you often change your rhetoric!
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]Where as you often change your rhetoric! eeoodares
  • Score: -39

4:44pm Fri 4 Apr 14

meme says...

regardless of legalities,,,,,,,,, it was a TRIAL.......... so why is it still running ??
regardless of legalities,,,,,,,,, it was a TRIAL.......... so why is it still running ?? meme
  • Score: -1

4:59pm Fri 4 Apr 14

CHISSY1 says...

Why the shock and horror at the outcome,councils do not give anything back.
Why the shock and horror at the outcome,councils do not give anything back. CHISSY1
  • Score: -13

5:38pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Dr Brian says...

It was a trial that has gone badly wrong - for the people of York the visitors to York and more so the Councillors (well the ruling party) of York.

It is a failure and failures should be thrown out as soon as possible

If Jimmy no mates and his band of merry men and women decide next month it is not a failure and that it should continue then it proves what most of us already know - They are failures and come next year they will be discarded and whoever runs York will reopen the bridge and alter the Coppergate scheme.

So why won't our pig headed arrogant leader of the council just save us all a year of suffering and at least try to salvage some hope for a few of the decent labour councillors that are left and admit it has failed!
It was a trial that has gone badly wrong - for the people of York the visitors to York and more so the Councillors (well the ruling party) of York. It is a failure and failures should be thrown out as soon as possible If Jimmy no mates and his band of merry men and women decide next month it is not a failure and that it should continue then it proves what most of us already know - They are failures and come next year they will be discarded and whoever runs York will reopen the bridge and alter the Coppergate scheme. So why won't our pig headed arrogant leader of the council just save us all a year of suffering and at least try to salvage some hope for a few of the decent labour councillors that are left and admit it has failed! Dr Brian
  • Score: -8

5:38pm Fri 4 Apr 14

oi oi savaloy says...

in these "austere" times, who is actually paying for kesten england and her cronies to consult with "legal expert's"??
in these "austere" times, who is actually paying for kesten england and her cronies to consult with "legal expert's"?? oi oi savaloy
  • Score: 8

5:47pm Fri 4 Apr 14

boroboy66 says...

Why on earth did we have the govermeant adjudicator come at all if CYC arnt going to stand by his decision?,obviously if he said it was ok he would of been unquestionable,alrea
dy going to cost 3million to correct their errors lets make it around 5m,and just cut school services or something nxt budget,after all the legal fees of course.
Why on earth did we have the govermeant adjudicator come at all if CYC arnt going to stand by his decision?,obviously if he said it was ok he would of been unquestionable,alrea dy going to cost 3million to correct their errors lets make it around 5m,and just cut school services or something nxt budget,after all the legal fees of course. boroboy66
  • Score: -8

5:51pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Geoffers says...

pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be riding a two wheeled bicycle!
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be riding a two wheeled bicycle! Geoffers
  • Score: -34

5:53pm Fri 4 Apr 14

boroboy66 says...

meme wrote:
regardless of legalities,,,,,,,,, it was a TRIAL.......... so why is it still running ??
A trial nobody wanted,and its still running.
[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote: regardless of legalities,,,,,,,,, it was a TRIAL.......... so why is it still running ??[/p][/quote]A trial nobody wanted,and its still running. boroboy66
  • Score: -49

5:56pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Igiveinthen says...

Justin7 wrote:
Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it.

It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings!
Jake777's mate has woken up again! Hope the carer gives a stronger dose next time!
[quote][p][bold]Justin7[/bold] wrote: Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it. It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings![/p][/quote]Jake777's mate has woken up again! Hope the carer gives a stronger dose next time! Igiveinthen
  • Score: -40

5:57pm Fri 4 Apr 14

geoff tibletts says...

I really am sick of this council they just don't seem to get anything right but get on everyone's t*t end.
I really am sick of this council they just don't seem to get anything right but get on everyone's t*t end. geoff tibletts
  • Score: -5

6:04pm Fri 4 Apr 14

yorkandproud says...

I'll go along with Mr Loophole. Give my brother his money back now.
I'll go along with Mr Loophole. Give my brother his money back now. yorkandproud
  • Score: -66

6:32pm Fri 4 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha
re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc
lub.co.uk/locations/
york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
[quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options... pedalling paul
  • Score: 31

6:40pm Fri 4 Apr 14

MorkofYork says...

Meh.. Bikes are just for lazy people who can't be bothered to walk. Stupid things cluttering up the town centre.
Meh.. Bikes are just for lazy people who can't be bothered to walk. Stupid things cluttering up the town centre. MorkofYork
  • Score: -92

6:50pm Fri 4 Apr 14

bolero says...

I didn't think that the legal argument was over whether the scheme is legal but rather the question of the legality of the signage and subsequent imposition of fines.
I didn't think that the legal argument was over whether the scheme is legal but rather the question of the legality of the signage and subsequent imposition of fines. bolero
  • Score: -48

6:56pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Geoffers says...

My understanding is that ANPR cameras have been used on a 'Bus Lane' and the Adjudicator finds the all the exemptions mean it is NOT a bus lane!
My understanding is that ANPR cameras have been used on a 'Bus Lane' and the Adjudicator finds the all the exemptions mean it is NOT a bus lane! Geoffers
  • Score: -61

7:16pm Fri 4 Apr 14

howmanymoretimes says...

pedalling paul wrote:
BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha

re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc

lub.co.uk/locations/

york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
You need to get your facts right Paul. You are not allowed to leave your car in a Park and Ride car park if you are not using the bus. I know this because I tried.

The No. 1 bus service is worse since the restrictions on Lendal Bridge. I'm regularly sat whilst the bus makes up time at Exhibition Square. We move on to the Station and wait again. If I'm very unlucky it waits again at the Pub on Front Street. If I'm in a rush, or my health isn't good, I have to take my car. I have physical problems which mean that i don't have the energy to always use my bike especially if
it's windy.

It's all well and good you spouting off and trying to make motorists feel guilty but we don't all enjoy the good health that you appear to have, or the time and inclination etc. to get on our bikes.

Until we have a cheap and reliable public transport system that everyone can access then I think that we should all be allowed to use whatever mode of transport suits our life style
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...[/p][/quote]You need to get your facts right Paul. You are not allowed to leave your car in a Park and Ride car park if you are not using the bus. I know this because I tried. The No. 1 bus service is worse since the restrictions on Lendal Bridge. I'm regularly sat whilst the bus makes up time at Exhibition Square. We move on to the Station and wait again. If I'm very unlucky it waits again at the Pub on Front Street. If I'm in a rush, or my health isn't good, I have to take my car. I have physical problems which mean that i don't have the energy to always use my bike especially if it's windy. It's all well and good you spouting off and trying to make motorists feel guilty but we don't all enjoy the good health that you appear to have, or the time and inclination etc. to get on our bikes. Until we have a cheap and reliable public transport system that everyone can access then I think that we should all be allowed to use whatever mode of transport suits our life style howmanymoretimes
  • Score: -50

7:17pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Dave Ruddock says...

one wonders how many legal advisers the council tried till they got an answer that they want. There are No Bus Lanes, Buses stop either side to get journey times back in order. It does seem the labor party are hell bent on not serving another term and wanting the city residents to suffer due to badly imposed restrictions that have none absolutely nothing to put the City of York on the World map for tourists, let alone the residents. It seems the only way the parties concerned might listen is if all residents refuse the pay Council tax, or at least any part that is in relation to these concerns. open lendal and open High Ousegate .. and why on earth did the council labor council open lendal bridge on their party meeting , its a foot bridge during that time so all council should be fined for there own use on the bridge .....
one wonders how many legal advisers the council tried till they got an answer that they want. There are No Bus Lanes, Buses stop either side to get journey times back in order. It does seem the labor party are hell bent on not serving another term and wanting the city residents to suffer due to badly imposed restrictions that have none absolutely nothing to put the City of York on the World map for tourists, let alone the residents. It seems the only way the parties concerned might listen is if all residents refuse the pay Council tax, or at least any part that is in relation to these concerns. open lendal and open High Ousegate .. and why on earth did the council labor council open lendal bridge on their party meeting , its a foot bridge during that time so all council should be fined for there own use on the bridge ..... Dave Ruddock
  • Score: -62

7:30pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Igiveinthen says...

pedalling paul wrote:
BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha

re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc

lub.co.uk/locations/

york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
Why would anyone in their right mind want to hire a car from City Car Club York, when they own a car that is probably of a higher spec, and what's that you say? Drive to a park and ride car park and then get a bike out of the boot and use that to get into the city! I think your avin a laugh.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...[/p][/quote]Why would anyone in their right mind want to hire a car from City Car Club York, when they own a car that is probably of a higher spec, and what's that you say? Drive to a park and ride car park and then get a bike out of the boot and use that to get into the city! I think your avin a laugh. Igiveinthen
  • Score: -71

7:33pm Fri 4 Apr 14

anistasia says...

The bridge closure should never of happened who asked the people of York.nobody as given a valid reason why the closure took place.what a farce.51 years this year Clifton bridge opened to ease congestion in the city then so why 51 years later the council closes a bridge when traffic is a lot worse over this time.it's not like closing deangate protecting something like York Minster.it a main route to the railway station.the trial should have ended so are tickets handed out now legal.hope people can and do get refunds.but caution here at what cost to the tax payer.
The bridge closure should never of happened who asked the people of York.nobody as given a valid reason why the closure took place.what a farce.51 years this year Clifton bridge opened to ease congestion in the city then so why 51 years later the council closes a bridge when traffic is a lot worse over this time.it's not like closing deangate protecting something like York Minster.it a main route to the railway station.the trial should have ended so are tickets handed out now legal.hope people can and do get refunds.but caution here at what cost to the tax payer. anistasia
  • Score: -65

7:34pm Fri 4 Apr 14

swh1963 says...

pedalling paul wrote:
BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha

re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc

lub.co.uk/locations/

york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
I have a car and a bike and I walk. I don't need a self appointed dictator like you Paul to tell me which I should use when.

As it happens I walk or use the bike far more than the car, even in bad weather and as far as from town to the out of town shops, beyond which (shock horror get over it) I use the car, as well as irregular dirty expensive and unreliable public transport.

I'm actually seriously considering going car-free next year (when my lease expires) given the expense and my own conclusions - not those you try to ram down my throat - about the environmental impact of cars.

Incidentally my experience as a pedestrian in York - and for what's worth in that bike-Mecca Amsterdam - is that cyclists are far more inconsiderate, ignorant, dangerous and law breaking than motorists. Perhaps the two policemen (why two?) who stand guard at the library side of Lendal Bridge, there to catch and fine those caught in the honey trap and trying to u-turn to avoid the charge, could get on their own bikes and catch the idiots who regularly cycle at speed the wrong way up one way streets at times these are designated as pedestrianised and at night without lights. Two days ago someone in Goodramgate almost ran me over whilst committing all three offences.

Welcome to democracy York-style, where the council gives the people not what the people wants but what they think the people 'should' want, stifles public debate on the issue at public meetings and uses its 'influence' over the the police - who are supposed to be independent of CoY - to enforce it.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...[/p][/quote]I have a car and a bike and I walk. I don't need a self appointed dictator like you Paul to tell me which I should use when. As it happens I walk or use the bike far more than the car, even in bad weather and as far as from town to the out of town shops, beyond which (shock horror get over it) I use the car, as well as irregular dirty expensive and unreliable public transport. I'm actually seriously considering going car-free next year (when my lease expires) given the expense and my own conclusions - not those you try to ram down my throat - about the environmental impact of cars. Incidentally my experience as a pedestrian in York - and for what's worth in that bike-Mecca Amsterdam - is that cyclists are far more inconsiderate, ignorant, dangerous and law breaking than motorists. Perhaps the two policemen (why two?) who stand guard at the library side of Lendal Bridge, there to catch and fine those caught in the honey trap and trying to u-turn to avoid the charge, could get on their own bikes and catch the idiots who regularly cycle at speed the wrong way up one way streets at times these are designated as pedestrianised and at night without lights. Two days ago someone in Goodramgate almost ran me over whilst committing all three offences. Welcome to democracy York-style, where the council gives the people not what the people wants but what they think the people 'should' want, stifles public debate on the issue at public meetings and uses its 'influence' over the the police - who are supposed to be independent of CoY - to enforce it. swh1963
  • Score: -62

7:35pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Yorkits says...

If it is legal or not is still very debatable! However, the closure of Lendal Bridge is still a pointless exorcise that has done nothing to benefit anyone other than the council coffers. How they can claim that closing a 100 Yard section of the "inner ring road", is beneficial to visitors, while traffic at either end of the bridge is still flowing, with confused drivers being forced through town in a different direction, is beyond logic! If you ignore all the buses and taxis, the bridge itself may be marginally quieter, but either side of it is chaotic with drivers being directed by Satnav around the "inner ring road" and over the bridge. Totally ridiculous and pointless, but well done York City Council - you have managed to alienate 53,000 voting motorists!
If it is legal or not is still very debatable! However, the closure of Lendal Bridge is still a pointless exorcise that has done nothing to benefit anyone other than the council coffers. How they can claim that closing a 100 Yard section of the "inner ring road", is beneficial to visitors, while traffic at either end of the bridge is still flowing, with confused drivers being forced through town in a different direction, is beyond logic! If you ignore all the buses and taxis, the bridge itself may be marginally quieter, but either side of it is chaotic with drivers being directed by Satnav around the "inner ring road" and over the bridge. Totally ridiculous and pointless, but well done York City Council - you have managed to alienate 53,000 voting motorists! Yorkits
  • Score: -61

8:07pm Fri 4 Apr 14

bolero says...

Can we not just ignore Peddling Paul? Just let him blether on as he has done for the last thirty years that I know of.
Can we not just ignore Peddling Paul? Just let him blether on as he has done for the last thirty years that I know of. bolero
  • Score: -62

8:17pm Fri 4 Apr 14

strangebuttrue? says...

I see the score changer has been very busy. First it is positive then like magic it is negative. Bit like the fines on Lendal Bridge first the are not legal then like magic they are!!
I see the score changer has been very busy. First it is positive then like magic it is negative. Bit like the fines on Lendal Bridge first the are not legal then like magic they are!! strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -50

8:18pm Fri 4 Apr 14

mutley12321 says...

Hello Paul,

Swh1963 puts it far more eloquently than I ever could.

Have you ever considered removing yourself from your lofty perch to join us mere mortals that do not have, in many cases; the physical abilities to enjoy the lifestyle choices you enjoy? It must be great to have the health to cycle, the ability to walk and then wait for unreliable buses, have the pension to support expensive taxis or, remarkably carshare? Some of the residents don’t have these options, why are you personally polarising them from the city?

You repeatedly dodged the issue and question of your own impartiality and involvement in this farce of a trial. Why? I’ve never thought you’ve ever come across as a coward and although I’ve agreed and disagreed with your previous postings regarding cycling, to regain any credibility you should step up and face the plate as you’re not doing yourself any favours in dodging key issues. If mistakes have been made, admit it, take the medicine and move on.

York is a city should be available and fully accessible for all, residents, visitors, able and non-able bodied alike. We need to make sure it happens.


Regards,

Mutt.
Hello Paul, Swh1963 puts it far more eloquently than I ever could. Have you ever considered removing yourself from your lofty perch to join us mere mortals that do not have, in many cases; the physical abilities to enjoy the lifestyle choices you enjoy? It must be great to have the health to cycle, the ability to walk and then wait for unreliable buses, have the pension to support expensive taxis or, remarkably carshare? Some of the residents don’t have these options, why are you personally polarising them from the city? You repeatedly dodged the issue and question of your own impartiality and involvement in this farce of a trial. Why? I’ve never thought you’ve ever come across as a coward and although I’ve agreed and disagreed with your previous postings regarding cycling, to regain any credibility you should step up and face the plate as you’re not doing yourself any favours in dodging key issues. If mistakes have been made, admit it, take the medicine and move on. York is a city should be available and fully accessible for all, residents, visitors, able and non-able bodied alike. We need to make sure it happens. Regards, Mutt. mutley12321
  • Score: -49

8:26pm Fri 4 Apr 14

level-headed says...

Why do we have such a thick-skinned, ignorant council??! A scheme which the majority didn't want is proven to be unlawful and they still kick and scream and with absolutely no substance, claim that it is legal. What is wrong with them??!!

And as for PP and others who want to tell me how to live my life, I use a car as it is my choice to do so and it suits my priorities and lifestyle. All the congestion mumbo-jumbo is hype created by people with too much time on their hands. York is no more congested than it was 30 years ago. We have the same queues now in the same places, and quite frankly, it doesn't bother me. I know how long it will take me to get through town at any given time of day and I'm happy to live with that. Those who immerse themselves in congestion woes talk about it like you'll be trapped in town all day if you once drive into it. Newsflash - you won't!! I can drive into the city centre from Strensall at any time of day within 30 minutes. Do I want to fanny about standing at bus stops instead to stop every two minutes for one person to get off or on? No thanks!! Bring it on - introduce congestion charges or whatever. Driving will still be preferable to the other options available to me, and above all, MY CHOICE!

PS - dear vote rigger, could you amend the votes to -1.3 million to commemorate CYC's financial position as a result of this fiasco - ta x
Why do we have such a thick-skinned, ignorant council??! A scheme which the majority didn't want is proven to be unlawful and they still kick and scream and with absolutely no substance, claim that it is legal. What is wrong with them??!! And as for PP and others who want to tell me how to live my life, I use a car as it is my choice to do so and it suits my priorities and lifestyle. All the congestion mumbo-jumbo is hype created by people with too much time on their hands. York is no more congested than it was 30 years ago. We have the same queues now in the same places, and quite frankly, it doesn't bother me. I know how long it will take me to get through town at any given time of day and I'm happy to live with that. Those who immerse themselves in congestion woes talk about it like you'll be trapped in town all day if you once drive into it. Newsflash - you won't!! I can drive into the city centre from Strensall at any time of day within 30 minutes. Do I want to fanny about standing at bus stops instead to stop every two minutes for one person to get off or on? No thanks!! Bring it on - introduce congestion charges or whatever. Driving will still be preferable to the other options available to me, and above all, MY CHOICE! PS - dear vote rigger, could you amend the votes to -1.3 million to commemorate CYC's financial position as a result of this fiasco - ta x level-headed
  • Score: -61

8:47pm Fri 4 Apr 14

piaggio1 says...

Dont you find it strange how merrit kept stum.when the s**t hit the fan .then all of a sudden it/he hears somert from a back street solicitor that he thinks is positive. ..???
And pp dont you dare tell others how to travel.
Remember.....most of us do NOT get FREE rail travel.
Thank you. I.m off to pontedera next week in a very very fast gas guzzlin alfa.
Dont you find it strange how merrit kept stum.when the s**t hit the fan .then all of a sudden it/he hears somert from a back street solicitor that he thinks is positive. ..??? And pp dont you dare tell others how to travel. Remember.....most of us do NOT get FREE rail travel. Thank you. I.m off to pontedera next week in a very very fast gas guzzlin alfa. piaggio1
  • Score: -36

8:50pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

The Great Buda wrote:
Well done, its legal.

However the trial is over: open the bridge.
No it isn't legal. The council's legal advisors (who are they?) have told them it is legal.
[quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: Well done, its legal. However the trial is over: open the bridge.[/p][/quote]No it isn't legal. The council's legal advisors (who are they?) have told them it is legal. Pinza-C55
  • Score: -76

8:57pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

the original Homer wrote:
Just read up on the Oxford case.
That was about a "bus gate" on the high street, which an adjudicator had said was not a "bus lane" and the High Court over-ruled him.
The issue was whether a short (15 metre) stretch could be a bus lane, and the court ruled that, since the only permitted traffic was buses, then it was a bus lane albeit a very short one.
This sets no precedent for York's case, as the adjudicator said it was the sheer number of exempted classifications of vehicles that stopped them being bus lanes.
The law is clear that Cameras and Councils can issue fines for bus lanes, that isn't in dispute.
What is in dispute is if York's are bus lanes or not. The adjudicator says they aren't, and for a totally different reason to Oxford.
The adjudicator will no doubt have been aware of the Oxford case, and has decided this isn't the same.
There's a roundup of the Oxford case here
http://www.localgove
rnmentlawyer.co.uk/i
ndex.php?option=com_
content&view=article
&id=2558:council-pas
ses-bus-lane-test&ca
tid=64:transport-art
icles&q=
and it's actually very similar.
However, as you say the adjudicator will surely have been aware of this and must see some difference.
[quote][p][bold]the original Homer[/bold] wrote: Just read up on the Oxford case. That was about a "bus gate" on the high street, which an adjudicator had said was not a "bus lane" and the High Court over-ruled him. The issue was whether a short (15 metre) stretch could be a bus lane, and the court ruled that, since the only permitted traffic was buses, then it was a bus lane albeit a very short one. This sets no precedent for York's case, as the adjudicator said it was the sheer number of exempted classifications of vehicles that stopped them being bus lanes. The law is clear that Cameras and Councils can issue fines for bus lanes, that isn't in dispute. What is in dispute is if York's are bus lanes or not. The adjudicator says they aren't, and for a totally different reason to Oxford. The adjudicator will no doubt have been aware of the Oxford case, and has decided this isn't the same.[/p][/quote]There's a roundup of the Oxford case here http://www.localgove rnmentlawyer.co.uk/i ndex.php?option=com_ content&view=article &id=2558:council-pas ses-bus-lane-test&ca tid=64:transport-art icles&q= and it's actually very similar. However, as you say the adjudicator will surely have been aware of this and must see some difference. Pinza-C55
  • Score: 10

9:56pm Fri 4 Apr 14

swh1963 says...

So the only poster here with a positive thumbs up is ....Pedalling Paul. Disappointed you could only give me -77 Paul, keep rigging or getting your mates to rig I want to see at least -3000 or do you think that would be more obvious than what you are already orchestrating? As I say welcome to democracy York style or Pedalling Paul style - they are one and the same, dictatorial, manipulatively undemocratic and transparently so.
So the only poster here with a positive thumbs up is ....Pedalling Paul. Disappointed you could only give me -77 Paul, keep rigging or getting your mates to rig I want to see at least -3000 or do you think that would be more obvious than what you are already orchestrating? As I say welcome to democracy York style or Pedalling Paul style - they are one and the same, dictatorial, manipulatively undemocratic and transparently so. swh1963
  • Score: -33

10:30pm Fri 4 Apr 14

jay, york says...

Sorry about the length of this post, but please bear with me bearing in mind that CYC think they can compare what they have done to what has been done in Oxford,

This is an extract from the Oxfordshire County Council website
" Bus lane enforcement in Oxford
_ Who is allowed to drive in bus lanes and through bus gates.
Bus lanes - Only registered local buses (not private coach parties), private hire vehicles, taxis and exempt emergency vehicles are allowed to travel in bus lanes.
Bus gates _ Each of the four city centre bus gates have different restrictions:
Bus gate Time Vehicle types allowed through the gate (it then describes quite specifically the restrictions in vehicle types and times that apply to the 4 different areas)
_ Please note that “exempt vehicle” means any:-
1. vehicle in the service of or employed by the fire, police or ambulance services when on an emergency call
2.police vehicle on patrol “ End of extract.

It is also interesting to see that in Oxford there is no mention of cyclists been allowed to use their bus lanes.

And finally, before you think that the CYC member using the name Justin 7 has totally lost the plot, yes there really is talk of a monorail for Oxford. This is an extract from The Oxford Student –
“we can’t rule out ideas that might seem fanciful, such as creating a passenger service on the Cowley branch line, a mass transit system into Oxford.”
“Why couldn’t we create a monorail connecting key locations around the city’s ring road?” he asked. “There are exciting times ahead. Towns across Oxfordshire are going to increase in size .......and the county council needs to lead the way in developing the supporting infrastructure.” End of extract.

OK a monorail is taking it too far, but why not open railway stations in Yorks suburbs with adequate parking provisions – it would certainly give us all a quick and convenient way to get into York and free up the road network.
Sorry about the length of this post, but please bear with me bearing in mind that CYC think they can compare what they have done to what has been done in Oxford, This is an extract from the Oxfordshire County Council website " Bus lane enforcement in Oxford _ Who is allowed to drive in bus lanes and through bus gates. Bus lanes - Only registered local buses (not private coach parties), private hire vehicles, taxis and exempt emergency vehicles are allowed to travel in bus lanes. Bus gates _ Each of the four city centre bus gates have different restrictions: Bus gate Time Vehicle types allowed through the gate (it then describes quite specifically the restrictions in vehicle types and times that apply to the 4 different areas) _ Please note that “exempt vehicle” means any:- 1. vehicle in the service of or employed by the fire, police or ambulance services when on an emergency call 2.police vehicle on patrol “ End of extract. It is also interesting to see that in Oxford there is no mention of cyclists been allowed to use their bus lanes. And finally, before you think that the CYC member using the name Justin 7 has totally lost the plot, yes there really is talk of a monorail for Oxford. This is an extract from The Oxford Student – “we can’t rule out ideas that might seem fanciful, such as creating a passenger service on the Cowley branch line, a mass transit system into Oxford.” “Why couldn’t we create a monorail connecting key locations around the city’s ring road?” he asked. “There are exciting times ahead. Towns across Oxfordshire are going to increase in size .......and the county council needs to lead the way in developing the supporting infrastructure.” End of extract. OK a monorail is taking it too far, but why not open railway stations in Yorks suburbs with adequate parking provisions – it would certainly give us all a quick and convenient way to get into York and free up the road network. jay, york
  • Score: -38

10:33pm Fri 4 Apr 14

welderboy says...

pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
Shut up Hepworth you t*t!
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]Shut up Hepworth you t*t! welderboy
  • Score: -60

10:35pm Fri 4 Apr 14

strangebuttrue? says...

Non of the bus lanes in York are bus lanes. Have you noticed the council also encourages Taxis, Cyclists and Motor Cyclist to use them. I guess that's because it triggers the bus gates more often causing more congestion and pollution and delays for the majority.
Non of the bus lanes in York are bus lanes. Have you noticed the council also encourages Taxis, Cyclists and Motor Cyclist to use them. I guess that's because it triggers the bus gates more often causing more congestion and pollution and delays for the majority. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -46

11:36pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Sage9 says...

I have looked at the Oxford Case and can see contrast. A quote from the ruling may be of interest.

"The bus gate was part of a carefully-devised traffic enforcement scheme operated by the council to reduce traffic congestion …"

Sorry could not resist that.
I have looked at the Oxford Case and can see contrast. A quote from the ruling may be of interest. "The bus gate was part of a carefully-devised traffic enforcement scheme operated by the council to reduce traffic congestion …" Sorry could not resist that. Sage9
  • Score: -26

11:45pm Fri 4 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

welderboy wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
Shut up Hepworth you t*t!
Which of us do you want to shut up? And I'm not anti car by the way, Cars can be good servants. But also bad masters.
[quote][p][bold]welderboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]Shut up Hepworth you t*t![/p][/quote]Which of us do you want to shut up? And I'm not anti car by the way, Cars can be good servants. But also bad masters. pedalling paul
  • Score: 22

11:56pm Fri 4 Apr 14

PeoplesRevolution says...

This council is run be idiots. This council are failing the people of York. It is no surprises they are sticking 2 finger at the decision with no htought people of York. City council are already breaking numerious laws set by the governemt. This council are worse the Dick Turpin. They are worse then robbers they would rob the own children piggy banks.
It time for people of York to take control and send a clear message to the coucil and not vote in the May 6 elections. The way the council are operating simply is not working.
This council is run be idiots. This council are failing the people of York. It is no surprises they are sticking 2 finger at the decision with no htought people of York. City council are already breaking numerious laws set by the governemt. This council are worse the Dick Turpin. They are worse then robbers they would rob the own children piggy banks. It time for people of York to take control and send a clear message to the coucil and not vote in the May 6 elections. The way the council are operating simply is not working. PeoplesRevolution
  • Score: 19

12:08am Sat 5 Apr 14

jay, york says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
the original Homer wrote: Just read up on the Oxford case. That was about a "bus gate" on the high street, which an adjudicator had said was not a "bus lane" and the High Court over-ruled him. The issue was whether a short (15 metre) stretch could be a bus lane, and the court ruled that, since the only permitted traffic was buses, then it was a bus lane albeit a very short one. This sets no precedent for York's case, as the adjudicator said it was the sheer number of exempted classifications of vehicles that stopped them being bus lanes. The law is clear that Cameras and Councils can issue fines for bus lanes, that isn't in dispute. What is in dispute is if York's are bus lanes or not. The adjudicator says they aren't, and for a totally different reason to Oxford. The adjudicator will no doubt have been aware of the Oxford case, and has decided this isn't the same.
There's a roundup of the Oxford case here http://www.localgove rnmentlawyer.co.uk/i ndex.php?option=com_ content&view=art
icle &id=2558:council
-pas ses-bus-lane-test&am
p;ca tid=64:transport-art icles&q= and it's actually very similar. However, as you say the adjudicator will surely have been aware of this and must see some difference.
The differnece is very obvious Pinza - I think the last paragraph of that is particularly interesting and relevant to York, bearing in mind that one of the criticisms by Governmants traffic adjuicator was actually about the poor signage around both Coppergate and Lendal.
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the original Homer[/bold] wrote: Just read up on the Oxford case. That was about a "bus gate" on the high street, which an adjudicator had said was not a "bus lane" and the High Court over-ruled him. The issue was whether a short (15 metre) stretch could be a bus lane, and the court ruled that, since the only permitted traffic was buses, then it was a bus lane albeit a very short one. This sets no precedent for York's case, as the adjudicator said it was the sheer number of exempted classifications of vehicles that stopped them being bus lanes. The law is clear that Cameras and Councils can issue fines for bus lanes, that isn't in dispute. What is in dispute is if York's are bus lanes or not. The adjudicator says they aren't, and for a totally different reason to Oxford. The adjudicator will no doubt have been aware of the Oxford case, and has decided this isn't the same.[/p][/quote]There's a roundup of the Oxford case here http://www.localgove rnmentlawyer.co.uk/i ndex.php?option=com_ content&view=art icle &id=2558:council -pas ses-bus-lane-test&am p;ca tid=64:transport-art icles&q= and it's actually very similar. However, as you say the adjudicator will surely have been aware of this and must see some difference.[/p][/quote]The differnece is very obvious Pinza - I think the last paragraph of that is particularly interesting and relevant to York, bearing in mind that one of the criticisms by Governmants traffic adjuicator was actually about the poor signage around both Coppergate and Lendal. jay, york
  • Score: -28

12:17am Sat 5 Apr 14

BioLogic says...

pedalling paul wrote:
BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha

re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc

lub.co.uk/locations/

york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
In short, no. It takes twice as long to take a P&R bus as it does just to drive to your end destination. Then if you want to go on elsewhere, you still have to go back to the P&R site to get your car. It simply isn't viable. And as for the folding bike idea, that's great. Until it rains. Which you may have noticed it does a lot. It's also quite hard to put your kids on a folding bike.

You are so desperate to be a clever d1ck that you miss the point. Yes there are transport options, but there is no transport SYSTEM! Just a load of disjointed services that don't link together and don't support each other. Coupled with the added cost and the added hassle factor, people are never going to be attracted to public transport in the long term. If I travel to London I will always avoid using the car if I can, because public transport is easy and I can get within a ten minute walk of whoever I want to be. It works so I use it. In York it just doesn't work. Until people like you realise that and try to encourage people to make the change instead of trying to force it on them, schemes like this are doomed to be hated and fail, just as the bridge trial has. Buses over Lendal bridge improved marginally in terms of punctuality and many other services got worse, because, presumably they were caught in the increased congestion on the now non-functional (ring) U road. Crucially rates of illegal PCN issue never dropped, meaning the system failed.

Wake up and get some sense and some perspective, you'll be a lot more successful in your objective, because the approach you are taking now is going to end in failure.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...[/p][/quote]In short, no. It takes twice as long to take a P&R bus as it does just to drive to your end destination. Then if you want to go on elsewhere, you still have to go back to the P&R site to get your car. It simply isn't viable. And as for the folding bike idea, that's great. Until it rains. Which you may have noticed it does a lot. It's also quite hard to put your kids on a folding bike. You are so desperate to be a clever d1ck that you miss the point. Yes there are transport options, but there is no transport SYSTEM! Just a load of disjointed services that don't link together and don't support each other. Coupled with the added cost and the added hassle factor, people are never going to be attracted to public transport in the long term. If I travel to London I will always avoid using the car if I can, because public transport is easy and I can get within a ten minute walk of whoever I want to be. It works so I use it. In York it just doesn't work. Until people like you realise that and try to encourage people to make the change instead of trying to force it on them, schemes like this are doomed to be hated and fail, just as the bridge trial has. Buses over Lendal bridge improved marginally in terms of punctuality and many other services got worse, because, presumably they were caught in the increased congestion on the now non-functional (ring) U road. Crucially rates of illegal PCN issue never dropped, meaning the system failed. Wake up and get some sense and some perspective, you'll be a lot more successful in your objective, because the approach you are taking now is going to end in failure. BioLogic
  • Score: 1

12:31am Sat 5 Apr 14

jay, york says...

pedalling paul wrote:
welderboy wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
Shut up Hepworth you t*t!
Which of us do you want to shut up? And I'm not anti car by the way, Cars can be good servants. But also bad masters.
BREAKING NEWS
Here we have pp (otherwise known as Paul Hepworth, that well known blinkered cycling advisor to CYC and prolific car hater) has acutally said he is not anti-car!!!
If we are to believe this, what on earth has all the twaddle, hatred and and anti car comments he has turfed out over the years been about???
Maybe he is adopting little jimmys approach - say anything to distance yourself from this fiasco to try and gain some credibility.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]welderboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]Shut up Hepworth you t*t![/p][/quote]Which of us do you want to shut up? And I'm not anti car by the way, Cars can be good servants. But also bad masters.[/p][/quote]BREAKING NEWS Here we have pp (otherwise known as Paul Hepworth, that well known blinkered cycling advisor to CYC and prolific car hater) has acutally said he is not anti-car!!! If we are to believe this, what on earth has all the twaddle, hatred and and anti car comments he has turfed out over the years been about??? Maybe he is adopting little jimmys approach - say anything to distance yourself from this fiasco to try and gain some credibility. jay, york
  • Score: 12

1:05am Sat 5 Apr 14

jake777 says...

Igiveinthen wrote:
Justin7 wrote:
Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it.

It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings!
Jake777's mate has woken up again! Hope the carer gives a stronger dose next time!
Yawn Yawn Yawn, same old same old, just get a life and live with it.The bridge is closed to you ha ha.
[quote][p][bold]Igiveinthen[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Justin7[/bold] wrote: Great news! All these dirty tourists who can't read street signs, trying to get their money back can go swing for it. It's our money now and we're going to build a Monorail with the proceedings![/p][/quote]Jake777's mate has woken up again! Hope the carer gives a stronger dose next time![/p][/quote]Yawn Yawn Yawn, same old same old, just get a life and live with it.The bridge is closed to you ha ha. jake777
  • Score: -33

1:09am Sat 5 Apr 14

jake777 says...

pedalling paul wrote:
BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha

re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc

lub.co.uk/locations/

york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
Well said paul, I will vote you for council.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...[/p][/quote]Well said paul, I will vote you for council. jake777
  • Score: -1

1:17am Sat 5 Apr 14

jake777 says...

howmanymoretimes wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
BioLogic wrote:
pedalling paul wrote:
TheMinsterMen wrote:
“We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.”

But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge.

Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre.

Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.
Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.
When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative.

Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend.

Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.
OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R?
Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha


re.com/
If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc


lub.co.uk/locations/


york-car-hire
So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner?
Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...
You need to get your facts right Paul. You are not allowed to leave your car in a Park and Ride car park if you are not using the bus. I know this because I tried.

The No. 1 bus service is worse since the restrictions on Lendal Bridge. I'm regularly sat whilst the bus makes up time at Exhibition Square. We move on to the Station and wait again. If I'm very unlucky it waits again at the Pub on Front Street. If I'm in a rush, or my health isn't good, I have to take my car. I have physical problems which mean that i don't have the energy to always use my bike especially if
it's windy.

It's all well and good you spouting off and trying to make motorists feel guilty but we don't all enjoy the good health that you appear to have, or the time and inclination etc. to get on our bikes.

Until we have a cheap and reliable public transport system that everyone can access then I think that we should all be allowed to use whatever mode of transport suits our life style
Well if you want to use your car then find an alternative route YOU DO NOT have to go over the bridge, and you need to Your facts right the no 1 is far better when the bridge is shut and like all routes they will only get better when the traffic is reduced.
[quote][p][bold]howmanymoretimes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BioLogic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TheMinsterMen[/bold] wrote: “We also take assurances from Oxford, who contested with a similar appeal with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and successfully won.” But the Lendal Bridge and Coppergate restrictions are nothing like what’s happening in Oxford. Anyone who knows Oxford (I do having lived there for four years), knows that it’s not just a closed of road but a restricted ‘zone’ - Oxford High Street if anyone wants to look at it. In Oxford, drives are clearly turned away from the restricted areas before you enter them and if you get close there are very obvious ‘Bus Only’ signs, York – ‘Restricted access’??. York doesn’t help itself at all by putting up a huge matrix sign directing drivers towards Lendal Bridge. Oxford’s bus services are also far more developed than the ones around York, there are bus lanes running along virtually every main artery into Oxford and where ever you are you won’t be waiting for more than about 10 minutes for the next bus to turn up. But the fact is that these public transport alternatives were in place long before their council decided to restrict the city centre. Furthermore, it should be noted that all of Oxford comes to a grinding halt during rush hour if you are in a car, it really is quite appalling.[/p][/quote]Every time there are proposals for more bus priority measures in York, we get the same bleatings for those who prefer to be cocooned inside their beloved cars.[/p][/quote]When are you ever going to get that it has nothing to do with someone's car being 'beloved'. York has NO joined up public transport system. For the many people that live outside of the city and work, shop and relax in the city centre there is no viable alternative. Personally my only alternatives to a car to get in to York is an 8 mile cycle ride (hardly practical with no facilities to freshen up once you arrive) or an hour long bus journey to cover those same 8 miles with buses that run once an hour at best and even less on a weekend. Its got nothing to do with 'Bus Priority Measures' and everything to do with no actual buses running the routes people need at the frequency needed to make them a viable alternative to the car, which is there when they need it as people have busy lives which means they have to be places at different times, which may not coincide with the bus timetable. So instead of acting like such a Pr@t condescending to every poor soul who makes the perfectly reasonable decision to use the car they have bought and paid for and for which they pay insurance and road tax, because it is the best as possibly only viable option for them.[/p][/quote]OK co could you maybe drive to a P&R site and take the bus on its partly prioritised route? Or take a folding bike in the boot and pedal in from a P&R? Or try Liftshare York to halve your stress and fuel bills. https://york.liftsha re.com/ If you need a car during the daytime for business purposes, City Car Club York offers hourly hire rates .http://www.citycarc lub.co.uk/locations/ york-car-hire So do you really need to bring your own (& presumably single occupancy) car right into York, and use our finite road capacity in a very inefficient manner? Think outside your four wheeled box my friend. There are other options...[/p][/quote]You need to get your facts right Paul. You are not allowed to leave your car in a Park and Ride car park if you are not using the bus. I know this because I tried. The No. 1 bus service is worse since the restrictions on Lendal Bridge. I'm regularly sat whilst the bus makes up time at Exhibition Square. We move on to the Station and wait again. If I'm very unlucky it waits again at the Pub on Front Street. If I'm in a rush, or my health isn't good, I have to take my car. I have physical problems which mean that i don't have the energy to always use my bike especially if it's windy. It's all well and good you spouting off and trying to make motorists feel guilty but we don't all enjoy the good health that you appear to have, or the time and inclination etc. to get on our bikes. Until we have a cheap and reliable public transport system that everyone can access then I think that we should all be allowed to use whatever mode of transport suits our life style[/p][/quote]Well if you want to use your car then find an alternative route YOU DO NOT have to go over the bridge, and you need to Your facts right the no 1 is far better when the bridge is shut and like all routes they will only get better when the traffic is reduced. jake777
  • Score: 20

1:48am Sat 5 Apr 14

Sage9 says...

OK Being more serious.

The York adjudicator was clearly aware of the Oxford High Court ruling as he not only refers to it but actually quotes from it.

Remembering that the York appeal related to Coppergate it seems to have won on two points, the adequacy of the signs and whether cameras can be used.

On the question of signs the Oxford ruling states:

"...where the signs have not been placed in positions where they cannot be seen or easily seen, are not obscured by vegetation or other street furniture, and are clearly visible and comply with Departmental Guidance, there must be strong reasons given for concluding that they do not provide adequate information."

The double negatives do not help, but basically if the signs comply in the information they supply and are well located, the driver has an uphill struggle to win an appeal.

In Coppergate, the adjudicator found that the signs were not adequate. The main point is that legally, this is a question of fact.

Frankly, whether the signs are correct or not is above my pay scale.

_____________

The York adjudicator accepted that the Oxford case created a bus lane but said:

"In my judgement notwithstanding the designation in the Traffic Order neither Coppergate nor Lendal Bridge can sensibly be described as a bus lane, street or gate but rather the roads are part of a general traffic scheme from which non-exempt vehicles are restricted at certain times and where buses are just one of the excepted categories or classes of vehicle."

This is supported by the Department of Transport who actually told York Council:

“We have considered legal precedents (particularly Oxford) and design issues bearing in mind this is a sensitive location and conclude this is not a bus lane scheme but a prohibition of motor vehicles so you need to remove the top panel “Coppergate Bus Lane” from the four
advance signs ......”

The York adjudicator ruled that Lendal and Coppergate are not bus lanes, or bus streets. He said "I find that neither location can properly be described as a bus lane or street with the result that PCNs should not have been issued on the basis of evidence from the roadside cameras.

This is an interpretation of the law, and this is more likely to be the bone on contention and where York Council's solicitors have found fault.

_____________

An appeal to the High Court can only be on a point of law, not a finding of fact. In other words, in this particular case for York Council to win an appeal to the High Court they will have to argue that the adjudicator has made a mistake in law. It seems to me that this is more likely to be on the bus lane point rather than the adequacy of the signs.


Now you cannot dismiss the possibility that York Council's solicitors have come up with a legal point. However, I suspect the adjudicator will have been carefully selected, well briefed and well advised. Furthermore, it would be a public relations disaster for York Council to take the case further unless they decided there was an important point to test in a the Court, in which case where there is David v Goliath situation, Goliath would usually agree to pay the legal expenses of both sides.

_____________

It must be emphasised that the York adjudicator is not saying that the restrictions are not valid. He has raised some points about the signs, but then argued that they are not bus lanes, in which case PCNs cannot be issued on camera evidence. Contrary to the suggestion in the article above, this does not mean motorists cannot be fined, just that they cannot be fined via camera evidence according to the York adjudicator.

I am willing to bet that the legal advice the Council now have is not as strong as they would like us to believe. Nobody is disputing that the schemes are not legally valid. Frankly, Kersten England's quotes add absolutely nothing to the debate. Dave Merrett, who has so far been silent all week on this matter, states he is happy that the new legal advice supports the advice previously received. Would that include the advice from the DoT quoted above saying you do not have bus lanes?


But you know what? This is not about points in law. This is about unpopular decisions being pushed through without adequate consultation. If the experiment had resulted in less congestion it would be widely supported. If the air was now clean on Lendal Bridge some would accept that was a benefit. However, the antidotal evidence is that the traffic has moved to other routes and the air quality is much the same as it ever was.

I very much doubt that even York Council will be rushing to Court on this. Win or lose in court, they have too much too much to lose elsewhere. Sooner or later a ruling authority will have to accept that the current restrictions on Lendal Bridge and not the answer and are not widely supported. The only question is which Council and when.

Oh – and that legal advice should be published in full. We have paid for it, we should be able to read it without having to submit a FoI request.

_____________

PS I would like to see the wording on any PCN issued to see which regulations they refer to.
OK Being more serious. The York adjudicator was clearly aware of the Oxford High Court ruling as he not only refers to it but actually quotes from it. Remembering that the York appeal related to Coppergate it seems to have won on two points, the adequacy of the signs and whether cameras can be used. On the question of signs the Oxford ruling states: "...where the signs have not been placed in positions where they cannot be seen or easily seen, are not obscured by vegetation or other street furniture, and are clearly visible and comply with Departmental Guidance, there must be strong reasons given for concluding that they do not provide adequate information." The double negatives do not help, but basically if the signs comply in the information they supply and are well located, the driver has an uphill struggle to win an appeal. In Coppergate, the adjudicator found that the signs were not adequate. The main point is that legally, this is a question of fact. Frankly, whether the signs are correct or not is above my pay scale. _____________ The York adjudicator accepted that the Oxford case created a bus lane but said: "In my judgement notwithstanding the designation in the Traffic Order neither Coppergate nor Lendal Bridge can sensibly be described as a bus lane, street or gate but rather the roads are part of a general traffic scheme from which non-exempt vehicles are restricted at certain times and where buses are just one of the excepted categories or classes of vehicle." This is supported by the Department of Transport who actually told York Council: “We have considered legal precedents (particularly Oxford) and design issues bearing in mind this is a sensitive location and conclude this is not a bus lane scheme but a prohibition of motor vehicles so you need to remove the top panel “Coppergate Bus Lane” from the four advance signs ......” The York adjudicator ruled that Lendal and Coppergate are not bus lanes, or bus streets. He said "I find that neither location can properly be described as a bus lane or street with the result that PCNs should not have been issued on the basis of evidence from the roadside cameras. This is an interpretation of the law, and this is more likely to be the bone on contention and where York Council's solicitors have found fault. _____________ An appeal to the High Court can only be on a point of law, not a finding of fact. In other words, in this particular case for York Council to win an appeal to the High Court they will have to argue that the adjudicator has made a mistake in law. It seems to me that this is more likely to be on the bus lane point rather than the adequacy of the signs. Now you cannot dismiss the possibility that York Council's solicitors have come up with a legal point. However, I suspect the adjudicator will have been carefully selected, well briefed and well advised. Furthermore, it would be a public relations disaster for York Council to take the case further unless they decided there was an important point to test in a the Court, in which case where there is David v Goliath situation, Goliath would usually agree to pay the legal expenses of both sides. _____________ It must be emphasised that the York adjudicator is not saying that the restrictions are not valid. He has raised some points about the signs, but then argued that they are not bus lanes, in which case PCNs cannot be issued on camera evidence. Contrary to the suggestion in the article above, this does not mean motorists cannot be fined, just that they cannot be fined via camera evidence according to the York adjudicator. I am willing to bet that the legal advice the Council now have is not as strong as they would like us to believe. Nobody is disputing that the schemes are not legally valid. Frankly, Kersten England's quotes add absolutely nothing to the debate. Dave Merrett, who has so far been silent all week on this matter, states he is happy that the new legal advice supports the advice previously received. Would that include the advice from the DoT quoted above saying you do not have bus lanes? But you know what? This is not about points in law. This is about unpopular decisions being pushed through without adequate consultation. If the experiment had resulted in less congestion it would be widely supported. If the air was now clean on Lendal Bridge some would accept that was a benefit. However, the antidotal evidence is that the traffic has moved to other routes and the air quality is much the same as it ever was. I very much doubt that even York Council will be rushing to Court on this. Win or lose in court, they have too much too much to lose elsewhere. Sooner or later a ruling authority will have to accept that the current restrictions on Lendal Bridge and not the answer and are not widely supported. The only question is which Council and when. Oh – and that legal advice should be published in full. We have paid for it, we should be able to read it without having to submit a FoI request. _____________ PS I would like to see the wording on any PCN issued to see which regulations they refer to. Sage9
  • Score: 12

3:28am Sat 5 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

I've said it before and I'll say it again... this Lendal Bridge saga is to The Press what Princess Diana is to the Daily Express. Turn the handle and out pops another version of the story.

------

Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should not be grouped together as though they are the same scheme, the only thing that makes them similar is that they got cameras at the same time (most likely a bulk buy discount!). Coppergate has been closed during the day to private motor vehicles for at least 2 decades - nobody complained about it, but it was violated an awful lot, so much so that when the Police did random strike days on Coppergate they would fine hundreds of motorists in just a 6 hour period.
People have only started complaining about it because it has hit them in their back pocket... and these people who contest the fines are merely wanting to be able to drive through Coppergate without paying the price, to be able to break the law without the consequence, doing the crime without doing the time. It makes me wonder if these same people walked into a completely unstaffed shop, if they would take stock from the shop without paying simply because they know they won't get caught.

----

York is choking with the amount of private vehicular traffic going through and around within it. We need road improvements and junction capacity improvements to get that traffic out onto the bypass, but the simple fact is this city cannot cope with the amount of traffic being forced through it. The city is getting incredibly close to Saturation Point... it is already happening for significant periods of the day along Fulford Road, and the entire city grinds to a halt if a big vehicle breaks down in the wrong place or if the A1 closes between Bramham and Wetherby meaning A1 traffic has to use the A64 and A1237... if things like this trigger gridlock in the city, which they do, it should be seen as a big flashing warning sign that something needs to be done.
I've said it before and I'll say it again... this Lendal Bridge saga is to The Press what Princess Diana is to the Daily Express. Turn the handle and out pops another version of the story. ------ Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should not be grouped together as though they are the same scheme, the only thing that makes them similar is that they got cameras at the same time (most likely a bulk buy discount!). Coppergate has been closed during the day to private motor vehicles for at least 2 decades - nobody complained about it, but it was violated an awful lot, so much so that when the Police did random strike days on Coppergate they would fine hundreds of motorists in just a 6 hour period. People have only started complaining about it because it has hit them in their back pocket... and these people who contest the fines are merely wanting to be able to drive through Coppergate without paying the price, to be able to break the law without the consequence, doing the crime without doing the time. It makes me wonder if these same people walked into a completely unstaffed shop, if they would take stock from the shop without paying simply because they know they won't get caught. ---- York is choking with the amount of private vehicular traffic going through and around within it. We need road improvements and junction capacity improvements to get that traffic out onto the bypass, but the simple fact is this city cannot cope with the amount of traffic being forced through it. The city is getting incredibly close to Saturation Point... it is already happening for significant periods of the day along Fulford Road, and the entire city grinds to a halt if a big vehicle breaks down in the wrong place or if the A1 closes between Bramham and Wetherby meaning A1 traffic has to use the A64 and A1237... if things like this trigger gridlock in the city, which they do, it should be seen as a big flashing warning sign that something needs to be done. Magicman!
  • Score: 16

7:40am Sat 5 Apr 14

HoofHearteds says...

I did warn you in the last thred about it being over turned:

"Calm down! It's just an opinion by some mid section adjudication pen pusher."

This is embarrassing for some now. In the thred claiming it was illegal to fine, there were some manic hyper bi polar rants and now im afraid they will be back to doom and gloom lol. This is cruel and has clearly revealed the unstable manic members of this forum. Woops lol.

I'm laughing so much I think i'll make a spelling mishtake
I did warn you in the last thred about it being over turned: "Calm down! It's just an opinion by some mid section adjudication pen pusher." This is embarrassing for some now. In the thred claiming it was illegal to fine, there were some manic hyper bi polar rants and now im afraid they will be back to doom and gloom lol. This is cruel and has clearly revealed the unstable manic members of this forum. Woops lol. I'm laughing so much I think i'll make a spelling mishtake HoofHearteds
  • Score: 67

9:11am Sat 5 Apr 14

nowthen says...

Lest we forget :Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws One official said “the unfortunate truth” of the trial is that cutting city-centre traffic will do little to reduce air pollution, a key reason given for the restrictions. Have the residents of York been allowed a say in any of this ? Of course not , we'll have our say via the ballot box.
Lest we forget :Coun Alexander suggested Coun Merrett should not do a TV interview about the scheme and another cabinet member should step in, saying: “I would try and share it out – we can’t have the scheme look attached to myself or Dave personally”deputy council leader Tracey Simpson-Laing told colleagues to “shut down” an email discussion detailing concerns over the trial, in case it had to be later released under freedom of information laws One official said “the unfortunate truth” of the trial is that cutting city-centre traffic will do little to reduce air pollution, a key reason given for the restrictions. Have the residents of York been allowed a say in any of this ? Of course not , we'll have our say via the ballot box. nowthen
  • Score: 14

9:37am Sat 5 Apr 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

It is prudent never to place confidence in that by which we have even once been deceived.

Two points of view, one published, the other one only referred too.

Adjudicator Stephen Knapp:

46. Clearly the Council has power to impose those restrictions but because Schedule 7 of the TMA has not been fully implemented civil enforcement does not apply and there is no power to issue a PCN.

47. I am reinforced in this view by the response from the DfT to the Council’s application for approval of the exception plates.

48. This was:
“We have considered legal precedents (particularly Oxford) and design
issues bearing in mind this is a sensitive location and conclude:
This is not a bus lane scheme but a prohibition of motor vehicles so you need to remove the top panel “Coppergate Bus Lane” from the four advance signs ...…”

49. The DfT went on to say that
“The plate beneath the entry sign to diagram 619 is hard to design and if normal rules are followed it ends up huge. We have therefore taken on board the sensitivity of the site and would exceptionally authorise the plate attached .....”
50. Therefore the Council is authorised to use the exception plate in connection with a traffic scheme for the prohibition of motor vehicles and not for a bus gate/street. The real nature of the scheme is emphasised by the Council’s decision to use the carriageway marking “Restricted Access”. As can be seen in some of the photographs this was not originally part of the signing but was added later because it was thought that it would improve drivers’ understanding.

So, let's see the councils expert legal report that they are so confident supports their position. Council is authorised to use the exception plate in connection with a traffic scheme for the prohibition of motor vehicles and not for a bus gate/street. Does the Council have a different set of rules to those advised by the DfT.
It is prudent never to place confidence in that by which we have even once been deceived. Two points of view, one published, the other one only referred too. Adjudicator Stephen Knapp: 46. Clearly the Council has power to impose those restrictions but because Schedule 7 of the TMA has not been fully implemented civil enforcement does not apply and there is no power to issue a PCN. 47. I am reinforced in this view by the response from the DfT to the Council’s application for approval of the exception plates. 48. This was: “We have considered legal precedents (particularly Oxford) and design issues bearing in mind this is a sensitive location and conclude: This is not a bus lane scheme but a prohibition of motor vehicles so you need to remove the top panel “Coppergate Bus Lane” from the four advance signs ...…” 49. The DfT went on to say that “The plate beneath the entry sign to diagram 619 is hard to design and if normal rules are followed it ends up huge. We have therefore taken on board the sensitivity of the site and would exceptionally authorise the plate attached .....” 50. Therefore the Council is authorised to use the exception plate in connection with a traffic scheme for the prohibition of motor vehicles and not for a bus gate/street. The real nature of the scheme is emphasised by the Council’s decision to use the carriageway marking “Restricted Access”. As can be seen in some of the photographs this was not originally part of the signing but was added later because it was thought that it would improve drivers’ understanding. So, let's see the councils expert legal report that they are so confident supports their position. Council is authorised to use the exception plate in connection with a traffic scheme for the prohibition of motor vehicles and not for a bus gate/street. Does the Council have a different set of rules to those advised by the DfT. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: 17

10:20am Sat 5 Apr 14

johnwill says...

Legal or not , that doesn't matter, the fact is the adjudicator is upholding motorists appeals and the council has to abide by the adjudicators decision, thats the point of having an adjudicating system.
The council could contest each decision through an expensive legal appeal but would probably not be successful, again why have a fair adjudication system and contest it.
ANYONE being issued with a fine now should immediately contest it, quoting Stephen Knapps opinion on the schemes.
As for James Alexander saying the Lendal Bridge scheme is to reduce city centre congestion and pollution , by the time a motorist has got to Lendal Bridge he's already in the city centre, too late .
Cheaper rail and park and ride schemes would help.
Legal or not , that doesn't matter, the fact is the adjudicator is upholding motorists appeals and the council has to abide by the adjudicators decision, thats the point of having an adjudicating system. The council could contest each decision through an expensive legal appeal but would probably not be successful, again why have a fair adjudication system and contest it. ANYONE being issued with a fine now should immediately contest it, quoting Stephen Knapps opinion on the schemes. As for James Alexander saying the Lendal Bridge scheme is to reduce city centre congestion and pollution , by the time a motorist has got to Lendal Bridge he's already in the city centre, too late . Cheaper rail and park and ride schemes would help. johnwill
  • Score: 9

12:50pm Sat 5 Apr 14

aac2689 says...

Judging by the heading,the legal team need to use spellcheck.
There is on one L in AWFUL
Judging by the heading,the legal team need to use spellcheck. There is on one L in AWFUL aac2689
  • Score: 4

4:24pm Sat 5 Apr 14

long distance depressive says...

asd wrote:
Ohh dear i see more expense, I can only see independent legal people seeing a nice money earner similar to YCC cash cow from the bridge and coppergate. This does not bode well at all for the citizens of York.
This was going to be the drift of my thread, only people going to come out of this happy are the legal people. Bet they are all ordering their new Mercedes now.
[quote][p][bold]asd[/bold] wrote: Ohh dear i see more expense, I can only see independent legal people seeing a nice money earner similar to YCC cash cow from the bridge and coppergate. This does not bode well at all for the citizens of York.[/p][/quote]This was going to be the drift of my thread, only people going to come out of this happy are the legal people. Bet they are all ordering their new Mercedes now. long distance depressive
  • Score: 4

7:18pm Sat 5 Apr 14

E Jacques says...

CEO, Kersten England, says legal opinion, paid for by York Citizens, cannot be divulged because it is privileged legal opinion. What an arrogant and self-serving statement by someone who signed off on this nonsensical scheme which has made City of York Council a laughing stock and has caused so much inconvenience and heartache to thousands of York residents and to so many visitors. She should be sacked for gross incompetence and for wasting public money on an undemocratic, unwanted, unnecessary and useless project.
CEO, Kersten England, says legal opinion, paid for by York Citizens, cannot be divulged because it is privileged legal opinion. What an arrogant and self-serving statement by someone who signed off on this nonsensical scheme which has made City of York Council a laughing stock and has caused so much inconvenience and heartache to thousands of York residents and to so many visitors. She should be sacked for gross incompetence and for wasting public money on an undemocratic, unwanted, unnecessary and useless project. E Jacques
  • Score: 3

8:57pm Sat 5 Apr 14

yorklover says...

I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason).
So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.
I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason). So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens. yorklover
  • Score: 18

9:20pm Sat 5 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

yorklover wrote:
I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason).
So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.
" cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city "
I neither own nor drive a car, nor a bicycle nor do I ride the bus unless I have to. I walk everywhere, sometimes just for the pleasure of walking.
I think the closure is insane and I think it is getting worse by the minute.
" So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings."
Those are paranoid delusions fed to you by the media.
"Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars."
It's absolutely no different except that a city centre bridge is underused. The Minster and Cliffords Tower look as beautiful as they did before.
"All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city."
You sound like a moaning Minnie yourself.
"Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point."
No wish to. I expect that my elected representatives might take my views and the other 200,000 citizens into consideration. When they are caught out as they have been here I do not expect them to hide and refuse to comment. That's not what I pay them for.
" Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport."
I already walk everywhere and don't bring "god" into it, she doesn't exist.
"The amount of cars in York is unsustainable."
The councils own figures show that traffic volume has hardly changed for 10 years. Sorry to bother you with the facts.
" I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage"
The council are supposed to be a democratic institution which represents their constituents. The fact that you applaud them for ignoring their constituents says a lot about you.
[quote][p][bold]yorklover[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason). So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.[/p][/quote]" cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city " I neither own nor drive a car, nor a bicycle nor do I ride the bus unless I have to. I walk everywhere, sometimes just for the pleasure of walking. I think the closure is insane and I think it is getting worse by the minute. " So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings." Those are paranoid delusions fed to you by the media. "Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars." It's absolutely no different except that a city centre bridge is underused. The Minster and Cliffords Tower look as beautiful as they did before. "All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city." You sound like a moaning Minnie yourself. "Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point." No wish to. I expect that my elected representatives might take my views and the other 200,000 citizens into consideration. When they are caught out as they have been here I do not expect them to hide and refuse to comment. That's not what I pay them for. " Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport." I already walk everywhere and don't bring "god" into it, she doesn't exist. "The amount of cars in York is unsustainable." The councils own figures show that traffic volume has hardly changed for 10 years. Sorry to bother you with the facts. " I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage" The council are supposed to be a democratic institution which represents their constituents. The fact that you applaud them for ignoring their constituents says a lot about you. Pinza-C55
  • Score: -2595

9:32pm Sat 5 Apr 14

jake777 says...

Magicman! wrote:
I've said it before and I'll say it again... this Lendal Bridge saga is to The Press what Princess Diana is to the Daily Express. Turn the handle and out pops another version of the story.

------

Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should not be grouped together as though they are the same scheme, the only thing that makes them similar is that they got cameras at the same time (most likely a bulk buy discount!). Coppergate has been closed during the day to private motor vehicles for at least 2 decades - nobody complained about it, but it was violated an awful lot, so much so that when the Police did random strike days on Coppergate they would fine hundreds of motorists in just a 6 hour period.
People have only started complaining about it because it has hit them in their back pocket... and these people who contest the fines are merely wanting to be able to drive through Coppergate without paying the price, to be able to break the law without the consequence, doing the crime without doing the time. It makes me wonder if these same people walked into a completely unstaffed shop, if they would take stock from the shop without paying simply because they know they won't get caught.

----

York is choking with the amount of private vehicular traffic going through and around within it. We need road improvements and junction capacity improvements to get that traffic out onto the bypass, but the simple fact is this city cannot cope with the amount of traffic being forced through it. The city is getting incredibly close to Saturation Point... it is already happening for significant periods of the day along Fulford Road, and the entire city grinds to a halt if a big vehicle breaks down in the wrong place or if the A1 closes between Bramham and Wetherby meaning A1 traffic has to use the A64 and A1237... if things like this trigger gridlock in the city, which they do, it should be seen as a big flashing warning sign that something needs to be done.
well said and very true.
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: I've said it before and I'll say it again... this Lendal Bridge saga is to The Press what Princess Diana is to the Daily Express. Turn the handle and out pops another version of the story. ------ Lendal Bridge and Coppergate should not be grouped together as though they are the same scheme, the only thing that makes them similar is that they got cameras at the same time (most likely a bulk buy discount!). Coppergate has been closed during the day to private motor vehicles for at least 2 decades - nobody complained about it, but it was violated an awful lot, so much so that when the Police did random strike days on Coppergate they would fine hundreds of motorists in just a 6 hour period. People have only started complaining about it because it has hit them in their back pocket... and these people who contest the fines are merely wanting to be able to drive through Coppergate without paying the price, to be able to break the law without the consequence, doing the crime without doing the time. It makes me wonder if these same people walked into a completely unstaffed shop, if they would take stock from the shop without paying simply because they know they won't get caught. ---- York is choking with the amount of private vehicular traffic going through and around within it. We need road improvements and junction capacity improvements to get that traffic out onto the bypass, but the simple fact is this city cannot cope with the amount of traffic being forced through it. The city is getting incredibly close to Saturation Point... it is already happening for significant periods of the day along Fulford Road, and the entire city grinds to a halt if a big vehicle breaks down in the wrong place or if the A1 closes between Bramham and Wetherby meaning A1 traffic has to use the A64 and A1237... if things like this trigger gridlock in the city, which they do, it should be seen as a big flashing warning sign that something needs to be done.[/p][/quote]well said and very true. jake777
  • Score: -1

9:44pm Sat 5 Apr 14

jake777 says...

yorklover wrote:
I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason).
So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.
well put my freind, these lazy trolls need to look beyond the end of their noses.
[quote][p][bold]yorklover[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason). So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.[/p][/quote]well put my freind, these lazy trolls need to look beyond the end of their noses. jake777
  • Score: -4

9:51pm Sat 5 Apr 14

jake777 says...

Pinza-C55 wrote:
yorklover wrote:
I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason).
So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.
" cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city "
I neither own nor drive a car, nor a bicycle nor do I ride the bus unless I have to. I walk everywhere, sometimes just for the pleasure of walking.
I think the closure is insane and I think it is getting worse by the minute.
" So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings."
Those are paranoid delusions fed to you by the media.
"Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars."
It's absolutely no different except that a city centre bridge is underused. The Minster and Cliffords Tower look as beautiful as they did before.
"All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city."
You sound like a moaning Minnie yourself.
"Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point."
No wish to. I expect that my elected representatives might take my views and the other 200,000 citizens into consideration. When they are caught out as they have been here I do not expect them to hide and refuse to comment. That's not what I pay them for.
" Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport."
I already walk everywhere and don't bring "god" into it, she doesn't exist.
"The amount of cars in York is unsustainable."
The councils own figures show that traffic volume has hardly changed for 10 years. Sorry to bother you with the facts.
" I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage"
The council are supposed to be a democratic institution which represents their constituents. The fact that you applaud them for ignoring their constituents says a lot about you.
says less about you, with the comments you have just made if you dont like it move maybe try Mars.
[quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yorklover[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason). So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.[/p][/quote]" cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city " I neither own nor drive a car, nor a bicycle nor do I ride the bus unless I have to. I walk everywhere, sometimes just for the pleasure of walking. I think the closure is insane and I think it is getting worse by the minute. " So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings." Those are paranoid delusions fed to you by the media. "Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars." It's absolutely no different except that a city centre bridge is underused. The Minster and Cliffords Tower look as beautiful as they did before. "All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city." You sound like a moaning Minnie yourself. "Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point." No wish to. I expect that my elected representatives might take my views and the other 200,000 citizens into consideration. When they are caught out as they have been here I do not expect them to hide and refuse to comment. That's not what I pay them for. " Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport." I already walk everywhere and don't bring "god" into it, she doesn't exist. "The amount of cars in York is unsustainable." The councils own figures show that traffic volume has hardly changed for 10 years. Sorry to bother you with the facts. " I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage" The council are supposed to be a democratic institution which represents their constituents. The fact that you applaud them for ignoring their constituents says a lot about you.[/p][/quote]says less about you, with the comments you have just made if you dont like it move maybe try Mars. jake777
  • Score: -3

10:28pm Sat 5 Apr 14

Pinza-C55 says...

jake777 wrote:
Pinza-C55 wrote:
yorklover wrote:
I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason).
So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.
" cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city "
I neither own nor drive a car, nor a bicycle nor do I ride the bus unless I have to. I walk everywhere, sometimes just for the pleasure of walking.
I think the closure is insane and I think it is getting worse by the minute.
" So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings."
Those are paranoid delusions fed to you by the media.
"Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars."
It's absolutely no different except that a city centre bridge is underused. The Minster and Cliffords Tower look as beautiful as they did before.
"All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city."
You sound like a moaning Minnie yourself.
"Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point."
No wish to. I expect that my elected representatives might take my views and the other 200,000 citizens into consideration. When they are caught out as they have been here I do not expect them to hide and refuse to comment. That's not what I pay them for.
" Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport."
I already walk everywhere and don't bring "god" into it, she doesn't exist.
"The amount of cars in York is unsustainable."
The councils own figures show that traffic volume has hardly changed for 10 years. Sorry to bother you with the facts.
" I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage"
The council are supposed to be a democratic institution which represents their constituents. The fact that you applaud them for ignoring their constituents says a lot about you.
says less about you, with the comments you have just made if you dont like it move maybe try Mars.
What a singularly ineffective reply. Is that the best you have?
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Pinza-C55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yorklover[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason). So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.[/p][/quote]" cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city " I neither own nor drive a car, nor a bicycle nor do I ride the bus unless I have to. I walk everywhere, sometimes just for the pleasure of walking. I think the closure is insane and I think it is getting worse by the minute. " So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings." Those are paranoid delusions fed to you by the media. "Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars." It's absolutely no different except that a city centre bridge is underused. The Minster and Cliffords Tower look as beautiful as they did before. "All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city." You sound like a moaning Minnie yourself. "Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point." No wish to. I expect that my elected representatives might take my views and the other 200,000 citizens into consideration. When they are caught out as they have been here I do not expect them to hide and refuse to comment. That's not what I pay them for. " Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport." I already walk everywhere and don't bring "god" into it, she doesn't exist. "The amount of cars in York is unsustainable." The councils own figures show that traffic volume has hardly changed for 10 years. Sorry to bother you with the facts. " I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage" The council are supposed to be a democratic institution which represents their constituents. The fact that you applaud them for ignoring their constituents says a lot about you.[/p][/quote]says less about you, with the comments you have just made if you dont like it move maybe try Mars.[/p][/quote]What a singularly ineffective reply. Is that the best you have? Pinza-C55
  • Score: -63

1:58pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Meldrew2 says...

jake777 wrote:
yorklover wrote:
I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason).
So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.
well put my freind, these lazy trolls need to look beyond the end of their noses.
The problem is it hasn't reduced traffic in the city but has increased levels of co2 due to the jams it's caused and the extra miles it's added to journeys.

Now look past the end of your own nose please!
[quote][p][bold]jake777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yorklover[/bold] wrote: I cannot believe how few people in York can see the benefit of closing the bridge. What narrow minded, car loving people you are with no imagination or vision for a better city (except Pedalling Paul - thank God for a lone voice of reason). So you want the floods, the pollution and all that carbon dioxide brings. Any kids/ grandkids? Do you really not care for them, only the immediate luxury of driving around in your polluting tanks of spewing filth. Anyone with ANY SENSE can see how beautiful the city is without the cars. All the tourists who write in saying they will never come back, I say 'good', we don't need anymore moaning minnies in this city. There's plenty already judging from the comments above. The outrage that people describe is completely out of proportion to what has actually happened. Terms like 'despotic' being bandied around to describe the council. Try living in North Korea chaps, then you might actually have a point. Frankly it is pathetic, all because you might have to actually WALK somewhere and leave the car behind or take a longer route or, God forbid, public transport. The amount of cars in York is unsustainable. I say well done to the council for sticking with the closure and I just hope they don't give in to the car driving bullies who flood The Press with their ridiculous outrage and who care only for their own convenience, not the long term health of our citizens.[/p][/quote]well put my freind, these lazy trolls need to look beyond the end of their noses.[/p][/quote]The problem is it hasn't reduced traffic in the city but has increased levels of co2 due to the jams it's caused and the extra miles it's added to journeys. Now look past the end of your own nose please! Meldrew2
  • Score: 0

2:00pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Meldrew2 says...

I forgot to add the paper, printer ink, electricity, stamps, etc used in sending out the illegal fines.
I forgot to add the paper, printer ink, electricity, stamps, etc used in sending out the illegal fines. Meldrew2
  • 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