Anonymouse wrote:

Nick H (UK) wrote:

Anonymouse wrote:

Nick H (UK) wrote:

SNIPPED



Why not ban cars from roads where they cannot pass buses?



Ahh, so you've swallowed the Bus is King line. Surely there's room
for everyone with correct planning, rather than crazy dogma.

If by swallowed, you mean agree with, then yes. I see you have swallowed
the "bus isn't king" line.

True!


Unfortunately, there isn't room. See below.


Why should bus drivers have the right to delay *everybody* ---
which includes all the other buses, before anyone replies with the
specious 'because they carry more people' argument. A bus blocking the
road may have a dozen people on board: it may be delaying hundreds.

Why not move bus routes to minor roads?




Why not move cars on to minor roads?


Cars use minor roads /anyway/. Put the buses there too and leave the
main roads free to get as much traffic flowing as possible.


Perhaps people want to travel along main roads. Main roads seem to have
plenty of traffic on them.

In any case, getting a double decker down a narrow London minor road
doesn't seem like a very sensible option.

Well, no perhaps not, but as an idea I think it could be developed.
Essentially, separate public and private treansport, to their mutual
benefit. Ahhh! I've got it: Trains!!!



This is London, not the highlands of Scotland. There simply isn't
enough road space for everyone to travel by car.



Actually I don't believe that. Huge amounts of road space have been
lost to cars through pavement widening, bus lanes, cycle lanes (which
many cyclists do not consider safe or want). Result: congestion. The we
have the spin that it is all down to cars. I believe that it is largely
down to engineering. It's all spin.


How many lanes have been lost?

Everywhere there is a bus lane at least one lane has been lost.
Everywhere islands have been put in the middle of roads that prevent
slow-moving traffic forming two lanes of its own accord. Really, I do
think it is a huge proportion.

Lanes generally make a difference, not
total road space. And surely pavement widening is a good thing (not that
I've seen much evidence of it in London). Cities are for people to live
in. I come from a city that was mostly demolished in the sixties are
rebuilt for cars, rather than people. It is now a dangerous concrete
jungle few would venture out in after dark (or before, for that matter).
Getting people (not in cars) out on the streets is good for everyone -
it reduces congestion and makes them safer for everyone.

Remember, before the congestion charge something like 14% of
journeys in central London were made by car, and we had near gridlock.



had? On the main road near to me (not in the congestion zone)it is
often gridlock. Why? Oh, sheer weight of traffic, many would cry.
But how many times do have the experience of taking half an hour to
approach and pass through one set of traffic lights, after which the
road is clear. An engineered jam!


Non-anecdotal evidence, please.

A118 passing through Manor Park. it is often clear by the time reachin
Ilford. A3 where it meets the road to Battersea. North circular at the
A1 Junction. Barking road at East Ham Town Hall.
....just a few of my regular favourites.

And the king of them all: Southall. Actually, there just might be /some/
excuse for Southall, because traffic converges from sveral directions.


Stop-start congested traffic: good for the environment? No. Nice for
residents? No. Nice for pedestrians, No. Who wins? the local politicians
and the council-tax (our money) spending staff and their crazy schemes.


Certainly stop-start congested traffic is bad for everyone. That is why
we need fewer cars on the road!

Cars can only be used by a small minority in large city - it's
difficult to see why they should be given much priority.

And why can't other drivers actually *use* bus lanes when
available? No; scrap that one because then I wouldn't be able to sail
down the available bus lane while everyone else waits in the single lane;-)


I can't see how delaying cars can be a bad thing on the whole.
Making driving in London really unpleasant seems like a good way to get
people out of their cars to me. After all, a similar policy was in place
against pedestrians for many years - look at most British towns. OK -
it's a shame for the small number of drivers who have to travel by car,
and emergency access needs to be considered. In the long run, though,
fewer unnecessary cars on the road would be to everyone's benefit.

The cause of the filling in of bus stops is that car drivers don't
let buses pull out.



Every bus delaying the traffic is delaying other buses as well. Why
can't anyone take in this simple fact? Traffic moving is traffic moving:
better for everyone.


Of course it is delaying other buses. But the total bus delay may well
be lower than if they also have to wait to pull out every time that they
stop. What is your SOLUTION to the problem?

But they all also have to wait for every bus that hasn't pulled in and
is blocking them.

If car drivers acquired some basic consideration for other people



If bus drivers (who used to be professionals, not road-hogging,
junction blocking idiots) acquired some basic consideration for other
people...


I do accept that the standard of bus driving in London is often not good.

(which it's questionable whether you can have if you choose to drive
in London anyway), this wouldn't be necessary.

A






Anyway, I've had enough. I'm emigrating. That'll be one less car on
London's roads.

Where to? India, where the traffic.... Oh! Never mind, can't have
everything:-)

But it does make London's traffic more bearable, knowing that I won't
have to put up with it for much longer.

--
Nick H (UK)