TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

John Rowland wrote:

http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.

Why not read the Transprt Against London page referenced in that report?

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/8948.aspx

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

John Rowland wrote:

http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London were
to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of the
congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening here at
the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who should have
known better screaming that it was a lie.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:43:09 +0100, JNugent wrote:

http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.

Why not read the Transprt Against London page referenced in that report?

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/8948.aspx

Yes, that's certainly helpful in deciding how much to read into this -
i.e., nothing. In particular, TfL don't suggest at all that they
gratuitously obstructed traffic, as the title misleadingly suggests.
It turns out that they "deliberately obstructed traffic flows" by,
erm, authorising roadworks.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
John Rowland wrote:

http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure
how
much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London were
to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of the
congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening here at
the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who should have
known better screaming that it was a lie.

If the idea was to make congestion worse when they monitored congestion in
the run up to the introduction then reset the phasing after to make things
look better it didn't work well considering all the reports like this:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....as_bad_as_ever

Despite a slight dip in traffic entering the city congestion is as bad as it
ever was, so it's £8 for what exactly?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

asdf wrote:

Yes, that's certainly helpful in deciding how much to read into this -
i.e., nothing. In particular, TfL don't suggest at all that they
gratuitously obstructed traffic, as the title misleadingly suggests.
It turns out that they "deliberately obstructed traffic flows" by,
erm, authorising roadworks.

You appear to have a reading disorder. Or perhaps you got tired before
reaching the end of the report? Or possibly you simply don't understand
that TfL will never accept blame but does leave coded admissions in that
report of the reasons for the congestion.

Note the references to "rephasing traffic lights" i.e. putting them back
the way they were before ken had them changed to increase congestion.

"Reduction of road space' - that is the encroachment upon road space of
bus lanes, cycle lanes, pinch points, the increase in the width of
pavements, reduction of roads to single lane etc.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008, John Rowland wrote:

http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure
how much to read into this.

They're a lunatic fringe speedophile pressure group. That doesn't mean
that what they say isn't true, of course.

But it isn't. If you like, you can read the press release they link to:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...ntre/8948.aspx

Or even - shock horror! - get in touch with your inner U Thant and read
the actual original document:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...rt-2008-07.pdf

Which says (in its executive summary, which is as far as i got - the whole
thing is over 200 pages!):

"Previous annual impacts monitoring reports have noted a trend towards
increasing congestion and more variable network conditions in central and
inner London. Given effectively stable traffic levels, this is believed by
TfL to reflect a reduction to the effective capacity of the road network
for general traffic. These capacity reductions are a consequence of the
re-allocation of a proportion of the effective road space, together with a
sharp rise in the incidence and intensity of road works."

"The capacity reallocations included pedestrian, cyclist and bus priority
measures and several major urban realm improvement schemes all of which
have required either specific allocation of road space (eg bus lanes) or
junction capacity (eg pedestrian all green traffic signal phases). These
initiatives, while generating beneficial effects, have reduced road
capacity for general traffic and have increased congestion."

"Increased road works have primarily reflected an accelerated programme of
infrastructure replacement by the utility companies generally agreed to be
an urgent priority together with increased development and construction
work reflecting recent buoyant economic conditions."

So basically, (a) there are a hell of a lot more roadworks than before and
(b) road space is being reallocated away from cars and to buses, bikes,
and people. Thus, less traffic causes the same amount of congestion.

The ABD's complaint goes like this:

"This latest report on the London congestion charge demonstrates the
fundamental dishonesty of all road pricing proposals," said the ABD's
Nigel Humphries. "They claim that by paying even more money to use the
roads, drivers will benefit from lower congestion."

Which is cobblers. Nobody's ever claimed that the London congestion charge
was for the benefit of car drivers. It's there to help pedestrians,
cyclists and public transport users, at the expense of car drivers.

tom

--
Eat whip you steroid wall-bashing lug-head! -- The Laird

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

On Aug 16, 6:30 pm, "Depresion" 127.0.0.1 wrote:
Despite a slight dip in traffic entering the city congestion is as bad as it
ever was, so it's £8 for what exactly?

Can you please tell us where you have hidden the control London? We
could use it for so many other things.

--
Abi

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

"Abigail Brady" wrote in message
...

Can you please tell us where you have hidden the control London?

Thankfully there is only one, can you imagine two of the hell holes? Hence
why we are using historical figures, from which there have been no
improvements as were promised.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:42:57 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

So basically, (a) there are a hell of a lot more roadworks than before and
(b) road space is being reallocated away from cars and to buses, bikes,
and people. Thus, less traffic causes the same amount of congestion.

The ABD's complaint goes like this:

"This latest report on the London congestion charge demonstrates the
fundamental dishonesty of all road pricing proposals," said the ABD's
Nigel Humphries. "They claim that by paying even more money to use the
roads, drivers will benefit from lower congestion."

Which is cobblers. Nobody's ever claimed that the London congestion charge
was for the benefit of car drivers.

I dunno, surely it goes without saying that, all else being equal,
there's less congestion with the charge than there would be without
it?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

"asdf" wrote in message
...

I dunno, surely it goes without saying that, all else being equal,
there's less congestion with the charge than there would be without
it?

Dose it?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Depresion wrote:
"asdf" wrote in message
...
I dunno, surely it goes without saying that, all else being equal,
there's less congestion with the charge than there would be without
it?

Dose it?


What with?

--
Moving things in still pictures!

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London were
to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of the
congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening here at
the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who should have
known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not
sure how much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London
were to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of
the congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening
here at the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who
should have known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the last
(say) ten years Doug?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm
I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.
It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London were
to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of the
congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening here at
the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who should have
known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

As i travel around South London a lot, you would have thought that I
would have noticed the 'perpetual roadbuilding and widening and
tinkering', but apart from a few new residential roads being built at
the same time as new housing I can think of none.
There is very little if any road widening taking place.
The majority of 'tinkering' is to stop up roads (leaving cycle
access)lowering speed limits & creating one way streets. This is usually
to stop rat runs & protect schools.
Woolwich is on of the worst areas at the moment with road tinkering &
that is to allow the extension of the DLR.

I hope you will still be able to cycle with your damaged foot, the one
you just shot yourself in.
--
Tony the Dragon

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

In message , Tony Dragon
writes
I hope you will still be able to cycle with your damaged foot, the one
you just shot yourself in.

That's Doug 'Colander Foot' Bollen you're talking to.


--
Ed Banger

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

On 17 Aug, 08:24, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not
sure how much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London
were to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of
the congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening
here at the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who
should have known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the last
(say) ten years Doug?

Do wake up!

Why cherry pick London where there isn't sufficient space available to
build new roads but M25 widening still seems to be ongoing? Over the
rest of UK there are loads of roads continually being built or
widened.

"Cost of Britain's road-building projects soars by almost £4bn

By Michael Savage
Saturday, 16 August 2008

Britain's road-building programme will cost the taxpayer billions of
pounds more than expected, with some major projects more than doubling
in price in five years, research indicates.

Figures compiled by the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) pressure
group showed that 41 road projects which had been calculated to cost
£4.45bn will now cost taxpayers £8.12bn – a rise of almost 83 per
cent.

Critics blame the Highways Agency, maintaining that at the time the
projects were approved it made major errors in its calculation of
inflation and the likely costs of materials, labour and compensation
for homeowners. The study revealed that improvements to one stretch of
the A14 between Ellington and Fen Ditton in Cambridgeshire had risen
from an estimated £490m in 2003 to £1.2bn..."

Mo

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...bn-898981.html

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

In message
, Doug
writes
On 17 Aug, 08:24, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not
sure how much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London
were to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of
the congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening
here at the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who
should have known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the last
(say) ten years Doug?

Do wake up!

Why cherry pick London where there isn't sufficient space available to
build new roads but M25 widening still seems to be ongoing?

Since you claim to live in London, Brimmy was just inviting you to write
on what you know about (which, let's face it, isn't very much).

Over the
rest of UK there are loads of roads continually being built or
widened.

"Cost of Britain's road-building projects soars by almost £4bn

That was an article about cost over-runs of existing road projects
rather than a surge in new projects, Duhg.


--
Ed Banger

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

In article c8cc6ed1-5611-4671-ba3a-
, Doug says...
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm

I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.

It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London were
to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of the
congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening here at
the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who should have
known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for.

Until PT can step up to the plate, it'll never happen.

--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

In article 5a4a808e-6952-481d-b554-3098a9ed7a79@
59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, Doug says...

Why cherry pick London where there isn't sufficient space available to
build new roads but M25 widening still seems to be ongoing?

Where is this widening happening, Doug? I can't recall seeing any this
year.

Over the
rest of UK there are loads of roads continually being built or
widened.

Actually, only a few stretches of the M1 are, Doug.



--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm
I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not
sure how much to read into this.
It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London
were to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of
the congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening
here at the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who
should have known better screaming that it was a lie.
Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the last
(say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:

"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but which
is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten years old
anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.

I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the M25
(whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let alone 10.

There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M) and the disgrace of the wrecking of the
(very useful) short stretch of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:

"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.

I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.
There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M)

Westway? Looks much the same as it always was, apart from the lack of
lighting.

and the disgrace of the wrecking of the (very useful) short stretch of M41
at Shepherd's Bush.

In what sense has it been wrecked?

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:

"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.

I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.

The A12 from the Lea to Redbridge opened in 1999.
The A13 from Dagenham to the M25 opened in 1998-99.
Waltham Abbey southern bypass opened in 2000
Orient Way in Leyton opened in 2001
Coulsdon relief road opened more recently
I think the A40 is currently being grade-separated through Acton

There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M) and the disgrace of the wrecking of the
(very useful) short stretch of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

Although they have been reclassified as 'A' roads, both are just as useful
as they ever were.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Doug wrote:

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting.

The experience within Birmingham, when the entire traffic light system
failed, shows that if it were truly lef to its own devices that the
traffic woudl flow better than it does at present.

Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for.

Or, sicne the evidence is that traffic lights make things worse it coudl
simply result in traffic that flows even if slowly.

Unfortunately, our road spaces are allowed to be demand driven resulting
in perpetual roadbuilding and widening and tinkering to the detriment of
the environment and quality of life of many people.

London's street plan has remained effectively unchanged for at least 150
years. So you're talking utter ********, as usual.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Richard J. wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
(Steve Firth) wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.
There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M)

Westway? Looks much the same as it always was, apart from the lack of
lighting.

No longer subject to proper motorway regulations (purely in order to
bring it under Livingstone's control).

and the disgrace of the wrecking of the (very useful) short stretch of M41
at Shepherd's Bush.

In what sense has it been wrecked?

It was (part of) a motorway, six lanes and two hard shoulders.

Look at it now.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

John Rowland wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.

The A12 from the Lea to Redbridge opened in 1999.
The A13 from Dagenham to the M25 opened in 1998-99.
Waltham Abbey southern bypass opened in 2000
Orient Way in Leyton opened in 2001
Coulsdon relief road opened more recently
I think the A40 is currently being grade-separated through Acton

I accept that I forgot the A12 and A13 improvements, but they were all
planned before Blair and Mad Ken's time.

"Orient Way" - wossat?

If it hasn't got a number, it's not likely to be an important highway,
is it?

The only one I can find is:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Orient+Way&sll=53.800651 ,-4.064941&sspn=9.806345,19.775391&ie=UTF8&z=15&iwlo c=addr

That doesn't look like a significant addition to London's highway
infrastructure to me.

The "A"23 Coulsdon bypass is a typical example of the "modern" anti-car
thinking of highway engineers in the pay of local authorities: single
carriageway (unbelievable!) and with a significant part of the width
conned-off for use only by buses (an admission of failure before it was
even opened).

There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M) and the disgrace of the wrecking of the
(very useful) short stretch of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

Although they have been reclassified as 'A' roads, both are just as useful
as they ever were.

Have you *seen* the former M41 recently?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
(Steve Firth) wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.
There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M)

Westway? Looks much the same as it always was, apart from the lack
of lighting.

No longer subject to proper motorway regulations (purely in order to
bring it under Livingstone's control).

and the disgrace of the wrecking of the (very useful) short stretch
of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

In what sense has it been wrecked?

It was (part of) a motorway, six lanes and two hard shoulders.

A motorway that went no where near any other and was a reminder of an
attempt to over ride the wishes of the population. The former A41(M) from
the Westway to Shepherd's Bush roundabout is, at most, threequarters of a
mile long.

Look at it now.

Redesignated to allow more people to use it and to gain greater benefit.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Brimstone wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
(Steve Firth) wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.
There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M)

Westway? Looks much the same as it always was, apart from the lack
of lighting.

No longer subject to proper motorway regulations (purely in order to
bring it under Livingstone's control).

and the disgrace of the wrecking of the (very useful) short stretch
of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

In what sense has it been wrecked?

It was (part of) a motorway, six lanes and two hard shoulders.

A motorway that went no where near any other

....apart from the A40(M), you mean? It was also meant to connect with
what is now numbered M1, some miles to the north. And it was meant to
cross the Thames at Wandsworth.

and was a reminder of an
attempt to over ride the wishes of the population. The former A41(M) from
the Westway to Shepherd's Bush roundabout is, at most, threequarters of a
mile long.

Look at it now.

Redesignated to allow more people to use it and to gain greater benefit.

Gawd - you sound just like Doug. You only left out the word(?): "Hitlerian".

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
(Steve Firth) wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over
the last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside
the M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years,
let alone 10.
There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage,
though. Witness the (former) A40 (M)

Westway? Looks much the same as it always was, apart from the lack
of lighting.

No longer subject to proper motorway regulations (purely in order to
bring it under Livingstone's control).

and the disgrace of the wrecking of the (very useful) short
stretch of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

In what sense has it been wrecked?

It was (part of) a motorway, six lanes and two hard shoulders.

A motorway that went no where near any other

...apart from the A40(M), you mean?

Although I didn't say so, I was referring to both of those roads.

It was also meant to connect with
what is now numbered M1, some miles to the north. And it was meant to
cross the Thames at Wandsworth.

Indeed. The population told the planners what to do with that scheme.

and was a reminder of an
attempt to over ride the wishes of the population. The former A41(M)
from the Westway to Shepherd's Bush roundabout is, at most,
threequarters of a mile long.

Look at it now.

Redesignated to allow more people to use it and to gain greater
benefit.

Gawd - you sound just like Doug. You only left out the word(?):
"Hitlerian".

Strange, I'd always got the impression that you were in favour of more
people being allowed to travel easily by road between various points in
London? Maybe I've misunderstood.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
John Rowland wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.

The A12 from the Lea to Redbridge opened in 1999.
The A13 from Dagenham to the M25 opened in 1998-99.
Waltham Abbey southern bypass opened in 2000
Orient Way in Leyton opened in 2001
Coulsdon relief road opened more recently
I think the A40 is currently being grade-separated through Acton

I accept that I forgot the A12 and A13 improvements, but they were all
planned before Blair and Mad Ken's time.

"Orient Way" - wossat?

If it hasn't got a number, it's not likely to be an important highway,
is it?

The only one I can find is:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Orient+Way&sll=53.800651 ,-4.064941&sspn=9.806345,19.775391&ie=UTF8&z=15&iwlo c=addr

That doesn't look like a significant addition to London's highway
infrastructure to me.

It's to carry lorries between the industrial estate at the north end and the
A12, and so other traffic will find Church Rd and Oliver Rd quieter since it
was built.

The "A"23 Coulsdon bypass is a typical example of the "modern"
anti-car thinking of highway engineers in the pay of local
authorities: single carriageway (unbelievable!) and with a
significant part of the width conned-off for use only by buses (an
admission of failure before it was even opened).

There are no local buses on the bypass. I've never used the road, but I
would imagine the major beneficiaries of the "bus lane" would be taxis from
Gatwick to London. Looking at
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1
it seems as if there is room at the northern end to create a flat junction
which wouldn't clog.

There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M) and the disgrace of the wrecking of the
(very useful) short stretch of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

Although they have been reclassified as 'A' roads, both are just as
useful as they ever were.

Have you *seen* the former M41 recently?

Yes, several times a week for the last three years. In what way did it used
to be better?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Steve Firth wrote:
Doug wrote:

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting.

The experience within Birmingham, when the entire traffic light system
failed, shows that if it were truly lef to its own devices that the
traffic would flow better than it does at present.

Where "traffic" doesn't include pedestrians or cyclists...

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

In message , at 11:45:29 on Sun, 17
Aug 2008, JNugent remarked:
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the M25
(whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let alone 10.

If you expand the horizon to 20 years, then that brings into scope the
Limehouse Link (and obviously a whole bunch of local roads in Docklands
- but let's not get in a wrangle about how "significant" they are).

Also my 1988 map doesn't have the A12 extension through Leyton down to
Stratford, but I forget exactly when that opened.

On the other side of London they widened the A40, including the stretch
past Hillingdon, in the early 90's (the slightly relocated station
opened in 1992).

And I expect some of the widening of the North Circular was still taking
place in that timeframe too.
--
Roland Perry

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

John Rowland wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:
Doug wrote:

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting.

The experience within Birmingham, when the entire traffic light system
failed, shows that if it were truly lef to its own devices that the
traffic would flow better than it does at present.

Where "traffic" doesn't include pedestrians or cyclists...

And?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:45:29 on Sun, 17
Aug 2008, JNugent remarked:
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let alone
10.

If you expand the horizon to 20 years, then that brings into scope the
Limehouse Link (and obviously a whole bunch of local roads in Docklands
- but let's not get in a wrangle about how "significant" they are).

Also my 1988 map doesn't have the A12 extension through Leyton down to
Stratford, but I forget exactly when that opened.

On the other side of London they widened the A40, including the stretch
past Hillingdon, in the early 90's (the slightly relocated station
opened in 1992).

And I expect some of the widening of the North Circular was still taking
place in that timeframe too.

I have to admit that since my post I have thought of the Coulsden
bypass, but of course the people of Coulsden may have wanted that ( it
has not improved the trafic either)

--
Tony the Dragon

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

"Conor" wrote in message
...
In article 5a4a808e-6952-481d-b554-3098a9ed7a79@
59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, Doug says...

Why cherry pick London where there isn't sufficient space available to
build new roads but M25 widening still seems to be ongoing?

Where is this widening happening, Doug? I can't recall seeing any this
year.

Over the
rest of UK there are loads of roads continually being built or
widened.

Actually, only a few stretches of the M1 are, Doug.


Locally there has been quite a bit of "road building" in reality it equates
to less than half a mile of fixing crap junctions that were put in when the
roads were first built because they were the quick cheap option. (Removing on
DC roundabouts and adding the ability to exit another DC from the other side
of the road without going up to the next junction then round and back).
Despite the council referring to it as road building it doesn't fool any of
us. Other than that there are some small roads being built in new build
housing estates but that's not adding to capacity as they are all effectively
dead ends.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Steve Firth wrote:
John Rowland wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:
Doug wrote:

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting.

The experience within Birmingham, when the entire traffic light
system failed, shows that if it were truly lef to its own devices
that the traffic would flow better than it does at present.

Where "traffic" doesn't include pedestrians or cyclists...

And?

You were implying traffic lights serve no useful purpose... if they enable
pedestrians to avoid getting run over, they serve a purpose, even if the
motor vehicles move better without them.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Roland Perry wrote:

On the other side of London they widened the A40,

Which is not new road building by any stretch of anyone's imagination.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Doug wrote:
(Steve Firth) wrote:

What new roads have been built in London (inside the M25) over the
last (say) ten years Doug?

I can name one:
"University Way" (part of the A206), which is inside the M25, but
which is not in London. The new-build part (which is now about ten
years old anyway) is in Dartford, Kent.
I am not aware of any other significant highway building inside the
M25 (whether inside or outside London) in the last 20 years, let
alone 10.
There are plenty of examples of Livingstonian road sabotage, though.
Witness the (former) A40 (M)

Westway? Looks much the same as it always was, apart from the lack
of lighting.

No longer subject to proper motorway regulations (purely in order to
bring it under Livingstone's control).

I'm not entirely convinced that it was ever a proper motorway, as the
relevant signs were blanked off many years before it became the A40, e.g.
the old "end of motorway" sign at the Edgware Road flyover. However, I
don't see that converting it from a motorway to an A road with restricted
access (no pedestrians for example) makes any practical difference as to how
useful it is.

and the disgrace of the wrecking of the (very useful) short stretch
of M41 at Shepherd's Bush.

In what sense has it been wrecked?

It was (part of) a motorway, six lanes and two hard shoulders.

Look at it now.

Since it's only half a mile long with a roundabout at each end, why would
you need six lanes? Even at an emotional level, I can't work up any concern
that it was the 6-lane M41 and is now the 4-lane A3220. It remains a useful
link with a quirky layout, as it's always been. To claim that it's been
wrecked is absurd.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

John Rowland wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:
John Rowland wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:
Doug wrote:

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting.

The experience within Birmingham, when the entire traffic light
system failed, shows that if it were truly lef to its own devices
that the traffic would flow better than it does at present.

Where "traffic" doesn't include pedestrians or cyclists...

And?

You were implying traffic lights serve no useful purpose...

No I wasn't. I was stating that without traffic lights the traffic flows
more smoothly than with. If you wish to infer from that that I am saying
that they perform no useful function then that is your inference, not my
implication.

if they enable pedestrians to avoid getting run over, they serve a
purpose, even if the motor vehicles move better without them.

You seem to be confused about the difference between traffic lights and
pedestrian crossings.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Doug wrote:
On 16 Aug, 14:48, (Steve Firth) wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/634.htm
I'm not sure who the Association of British Drivers are, so I'm not sure how
much to read into this.
It's hardly news. Anyone working in transport/telematics already knew
that Livingstone had issued an edict that the lights across London were
to be rephased to cause congestion prior to the introduction of the
congestion charge. In fact I stated this was what was happening here at
the time and had the usual cabal of ****wits and some who should have
known better screaming that it was a lie.

Road congestion is primarily caused by too many cars and if left to
its own devices would be self-limiting. Indeed it could even result in
a reduction of car travel as motorists get fed up with so many delays
they are themselves responsible for. Unfortunately, our road spaces
are allowed to be demand driven resulting in perpetual roadbuilding
and widening and tinkering to the detriment of the environment and
quality of life of many people.

Whilst this is partly true it does not accept the fact that congestion
can be made artificially worse to a major degree using such measures as
traffic light phasing as has now been admitted and failure to build new
roads. This is where the tinkering has gone on for the last few years.

As Brimstone says, where are these roads that have been built inside the
M25? I haven't seen any.


--
John Wright

"What would happen if you eliminated the autism genes from the gene pool?

You would have a bunch of people standing around in a cave, chatting and
socialising and not getting anything done!" - Professor Temple Grandin