Launched today by the Mayor of London is this initial consultation
document on the likely direction and principles to be used in the
updated Mayoral Transport Strategy.

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/publi.../way-to-go.pdf

Press release here

http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_...eleaseid=19568

I'll resist the temptation to comment further and leave it to those who
are interested to respond.

[x posted to utl]

--
Paul C

'Rephrasing traffic lights' - interesting idea. Maybe as 'illuminated
vehicle flow controllers'?

Paul Corfield wrote:
Launched today by the Mayor of London is this initial consultation
document on the likely direction and principles to be used in the
updated Mayoral Transport Strategy.

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/publi.../way-to-go.pdf

Good Lord, it appears to show white men who are neither evading their fares
nor working as rapist minicab drivers. If this can really happen, the
previous mayor kept it pretty quiet!

John Rowland wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
Launched today by the Mayor of London is this initial consultation
document on the likely direction and principles to be used in the
updated Mayoral Transport Strategy.

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/publi.../way-to-go.pdf

Good Lord, it appears to show white men who are neither evading their fares
nor working as rapist minicab drivers. If this can really happen, the
previous mayor kept it pretty quiet!


Well, that's good. As long as white men aren't being victimised, the
fact that the brochure is unutterable horse***** doesn't matter, eh?
Welcome to four wasted years.

Faugh. Tchah.

Tom

* Boris, to the TfL Board, slightly paraphrased - 'the car is the single
biggest contributor to female emancipation'. Hello? You're not a
rightwing journalist any more, mate.

On Nov 6, 12:14*pm, Tom Barry wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
Launched today by the Mayor of London is this initial consultation
document on the likely direction and principles to be used in the
updated Mayoral Transport Strategy.

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/publi.../way-to-go.pdf

Good Lord, it appears to show white men who are neither evading their fares
nor working as rapist minicab drivers. If this can really happen, the
previous mayor kept it pretty quiet!

Well, that's good. *As long as white men aren't being victimised, the
fact that the brochure is unutterable horse***** doesn't matter, eh?
Welcome to four wasted years.

Faugh. *Tchah.

Tom

* Boris, to the TfL Board, slightly paraphrased - 'the car is the single
* biggest contributor to female emancipation'. *Hello? *You're not a
rightwing journalist any more, mate.

The sun is shining and you can't see any of those nasty leftwing
troublemakers who'll be sacked now. The picture is pretty accurate,
'cos bike and expensive taxi will be the only way to get around when
all the strikes those job cuts will spawn come along. Unless you have
a 4x4 of course, as they don't cause congestion according to Boris.

Neill

On 6 Nov, 14:17, Neill wrote:

The sun is shining and you can't see any of those nasty leftwing
troublemakers who'll be sacked now. The picture is pretty accurate,
'cos bike and expensive taxi will be the only way to get around when
all the strikes those job cuts will spawn come along. Unless you have
a 4x4 of course, as they don't cause congestion according to Boris.

It is a fact that a 4x4 causes no more of a traffic jam than a
normally-sized car. A Land Rover Defender SWB, for instance, is as I
recall shorter and narrower then a Vauxhall Corsa.

There is an argument for a pollution charge to be made against such
vehicles (and also against large-engined sports cars, whatever their
physical size), but it is then not a *Congestion* Charge, it is a
*Pollution* charge. These are two different things, and I think Boris
is being quite honest in making this clear.

Neil

On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 07:04:18 -0800 (PST),
Neil Williams wrote:
On 6 Nov, 14:17, Neill wrote:

The sun is shining and you can't see any of those nasty leftwing
troublemakers who'll be sacked now. The picture is pretty accurate,
'cos bike and expensive taxi will be the only way to get around when
all the strikes those job cuts will spawn come along. Unless you have
a 4x4 of course, as they don't cause congestion according to Boris.

It is a fact that a 4x4 causes no more of a traffic jam than a
normally-sized car. A Land Rover Defender SWB, for instance, is as I
recall shorter and narrower then a Vauxhall Corsa.

This doesn't necessarily follow. A 4x4 waiting to turn R out of a
junction onto a main road can block traffic wanting to turn L out of the
same road because they cannot see around or through or over the bonnet
of the larger car.

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://www.woodall.me.uk/

On 6 Nov, 15:04, Neil Williams wrote:

It is a fact that a 4x4 causes no more of a traffic jam than a
normally-sized car. *A Land Rover Defender SWB, for instance, is as I
recall shorter and narrower then a Vauxhall Corsa.

Unfortunately a Land Rover Defender SWB is not representative of the
4x4 vehicles you see on the streets of London. Most 4x4 vehicles,
people carriers and other similar vehicles are that bit wider, longer
and higher and make a significant difference to other road users -
when parking, turning out of junctions, trying to move around in
queues, passing on narrow roads with parked cars. The other frequent
problem with these* is tinted windows that are too dark to see through
properly, so you can't make eye contact and you can't see through to
the other end/side.

* I know it's not only these types of vehicle that get tinted windows,
but it seems more likely - so that you can't see the little darlings
in the back, or can't see the £10,000 Rolex on the driver's wrist
(stereotypical but fairly tru-ish example reasons)

gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

The other frequent problem with these* is tinted windows that are too
dark to see through properly, so you can't make eye contact and you
can't see through to the other end/side.

There ought to be a law against front windows being darker than, ooh,
about 70% VLT...

If TPTB were really serious about it, they could enforce it by giving
plod cool little hand-held light transmission doofers, so that if they
suspect somebody's got windows too dark they can serve a vehicle
prohibition notice and get it off the road until the tint's been removed.

They could even put legislation in place that the installer of the tint
or seller of the vehicle could be prosecuted.

Nah, it'll never happen.

Oh, wait, what was that? Damn near five years ago?
http://www.window-tinting.net/thelaw.html

On 6 Nov, 15:20, Tim Woodall wrote:

This doesn't necessarily follow. A 4x4 waiting to turn R out of a
junction onto a main road can block traffic wanting to turn L out of the
same road because they cannot see around or through or over the bonnet
of the larger car.

In which case it is only fair to charge MPVs and vans etc (including
electric vehicles) the same amount

Neil