Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...n-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 2014\05\12 16:29, David Walters wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...n-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

So that's why Boris sold his house in Furlong Road...

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 12/05/2014 16:29, David Walters wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...n-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.


For the sake of comparison, Crossrail is set to cost £15 billion.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In message , at 16:29:30 on
Mon, 12 May 2014, David Walters remarked:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...n-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

I wonder how may tube lines it'll cross, and whether over or under.

(Subsurface lines presumably "under")
--
Roland Perry

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?


This looks like 1960s car insanity to me, likely to generate a lot more
traffic.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Mon, 12 May 2014 16:29:30 +0100
David Walters wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...22mile-ringroa
-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

Sounds like Brussels. ****ing fume filled nightmare last time I drove it
back in the 90s.

--
Spud

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

wrote in message
...
In article ,

(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities
and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

They have it it Brussels

It's a nightmare to drive on (as the on/off ramps are pretty short), but it
seems to work at lessening the traffic on the normal streets

tim

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Mon, 12 May 2014 14:46:55 -0500
wrote:
In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?


This looks like 1960s car insanity to me, likely to generate a lot more
traffic.

Unless its a replacement for the north circular. But frankly the money would
be a lot better spent building a outer circle line for the tube since the
north london line just does not cut the mustard - too slow, trains too
infrequent and **** poor interconnections with the tube.

--
Spud

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Mon, 12 May 2014 19:50:10 +0000 (UTC),
d wrote:
Sounds like Brussels. ****ing fume filled nightmare last time I
drove it
back in the 90s.

Or Birmingham?

Neil

--
Neil Williams. Use neil before the at to reply.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 2014\05\12 20:46, wrote:
In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?


This looks like 1960s car insanity to me, likely to generate a lot more
traffic.


It'll reduce jams on the M25 though! ;-)

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In article ,
(Basil Jet) wrote:

On 2014\05\12 20:46, wrote:
In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long
underground ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities
and why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

This looks like 1960s car insanity to me, likely to generate a lot more
traffic.

It'll reduce jams on the M25 though! ;-)

Initially maybe but it would grow total traffic and jams would return very
soon. Did they learn nothing in the 1960s and 70s?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Mon, 12 May 2014 19:56:16 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Mon, 12 May 2014 14:46:55 -0500
wrote:
In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?


This looks like 1960s car insanity to me, likely to generate a lot more
traffic.

Unless its a replacement for the north circular.

It's a lot further in than the north circular. It also doesn't seem to
'replace' much, the only talk of replacement I've heard is making Tower
Bridge into a bus lane.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Mon, 12 May 2014 20:27:39 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:29:30 on
Mon, 12 May 2014, David Walters remarked:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...n-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long underground
ring road can be revealed today.

I wonder how may tube lines it'll cross, and whether over or under.

(Subsurface lines presumably "under")

There are a few bits where I don't quite understand where they will fit it
all in. For example Highbury Corner already has a couple of underground
railways so I assume the new road tunnel would need to be very deep to
go under them which then means very long portal tunnels.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:46:55PM -0500, wrote:

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using
it.

--
David Cantrell | even more awesome than a panda-fur coat

We found no search results for "crotchet". Did you mean "crotch"?

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:46:55PM -0500,
wrote:

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their
localities and why would it divert anything from the streets in
central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using it.

I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate new
traffic.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In message , at 12:22:55
on Wed, 14 May 2014, David Cantrell remarked:
What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using
it.

Ah yes, the "South Circular"; once described as a 'collection of
signposts' rather than an actual road.
--
Roland Perry

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
12:22:55 on Wed, 14 May 2014, David Cantrell
remarked:
What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities
and why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using it.

Ah yes, the "South Circular"; once described as a 'collection of
signposts' rather than an actual road.

Still is, I believe, where I come from (Putney).

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 14/05/2014 17:07, wrote:
[...]
What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities
and why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using it.

Ah yes, the "South Circular"; once described as a 'collection of
signposts' rather than an actual road.

Still is, I believe, where I come from (Putney).

Same can be said of the whole thing - almost all of it is single
carriageway, the only thing it shares with the North Circular is half a
name.

That said, the signposts are better than they once were - I think it was
in the mid/late 90's when there was a big resigning project by the
Traffic Director for London (which was a kind of pseudo-agency of the
Department of Transport) on the trunk routes around the metropolis, and
TfL keeps them up to scratch - beforehand they'd degenerated into a bit
of a mess.

In the pre satnav days I've a recollection of being asked several times
for directions to Dover by continental car drivers in various places
around south London - I think many were either searching for or had
mislaid the South Circular!

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 06:31:52AM -0500, wrote:
In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:
It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using it.

I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate new
traffic.

So do railways. So clearly it's pointless to build or upgrade railways
because they'll only get clogged up with pesky passengers.

But anyway, you, my friend, appear to have not absorbed the lessons of
how junctions and conflicting movements impede traffic flow. THAT's the
problem of the south circular.

--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive

Irregular English:
ladies glow; gentlemen perspire; brutes, oafs and athletes sweat

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In message , at 11:21:23
on Fri, 16 May 2014, David Cantrell remarked:
I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate new
traffic.

So do railways. So clearly it's pointless to build or upgrade railways
because they'll only get clogged up with pesky passengers.

Same with airports. Another runway or terminal, and all that happens is
more passengers clog them up.

On the other hand, we are told that better transport links grow the
economy, but Colin doesn't want that in his back yard, it seems.
--
Roland Perry

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 06:31:52AM -0500,
wrote:
In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:
It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using
it.

I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate
new traffic.

So do railways. So clearly it's pointless to build or upgrade railways
because they'll only get clogged up with pesky passengers.

Not at all. As has been demonstrated over the last 20 years, the railways
have handled huge increases in traffic surprisingly easily.

But anyway, you, my friend, appear to have not absorbed the lessons of
how junctions and conflicting movements impede traffic flow. THAT's the
problem of the south circular.

Ho, ho! How simplistic!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

The railway industry and its supporters seem to disagree with you. They are
always trying to whip up a panic about the need for still more tax-payers'
money to cope with the overcrowding and general lack of capacity. In fact,
a supposed lack of capacity is now the pretext for HS2 as the need for higher
speeds and shorter journey times is no longer credible.

As a fairly regular user of parts of the South Circular - the parts which have
not been ruined - I can't see what is simplistic about David Cantrell's
assessment of the road.

I can guess what lessons you've drawn from the past, but whether they're
valid is questionable.

The 1960s and '70s was a period of increasing prosperity in which more and
more people found that they could afford to buy their own vehicle and move
about freely. It was also a period in which successive Governments tried to
reduce London's population. For example: Milton Keynes. Since 1979, our
country has experienced continuously falling prosperity and today a much
smaller percentage of working people have well-paid jobs than was the case
in the '60s and '70s. The population of London has grown enormously and no
longer is any attempt made by politicians to move people to new towns. The
inevitable and entirely predictable result is that London's population has far
outgrown the infrastructure.

The growth in car-ownership has stalled partly as a result of low incomes,
partly because the roads no longer function properly and partly because
young people cannot afford car insurance. There is no reason to assume that
increasing road capacity would lead to a substantial increase in car travel.

It should always be borne in mind that in the '60s and '70s car ownership
increased in general, including in parts of the country where the roads were
not improved. There is no reliable, incontestable evidence that car ownership
increased merely because roads were improved.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 09:38:19AM -0500, wrote:
(David Cantrell) wrote:
wrote:
I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate
new traffic.
So do railways. So clearly it's pointless to build or upgrade railways
because they'll only get clogged up with pesky passengers.
Not at all. As has been demonstrated over the last 20 years, the railways
have handled huge increases in traffic surprisingly easily.

Mmmm. Just because they make it *look* easy doesn't mean that all the
civil engineers, train builders, timetablers and so on are just slacking
off.

But anyway, you, my friend, appear to have not absorbed the lessons of
how junctions and conflicting movements impede traffic flow. THAT's the
problem of the south circular.
Ho, ho! How simplistic!

Then enlighten me, oh wise sage, how would you either make the south
circular fit for purpose or unneeded?

--
David Cantrell | Reality Engineer, Ministry of Information

When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life
-- Samuel Johnson

I drove along part of the South Circular this afternoon, from Brixton Hill to
Forest Hill. The road is quite inadequate for the volume of traffic. TfL, of
course, have made matters worse by installing additional and unnecessary
traffic signals. (What else is new!)

Boris Johnson's balderdash suggestion might be appropriate for this road. (His
tunnel-building proposal is general is mere publicity-seeking moonshine
designed solely to advance his career. He obviously realises that his pro
cycling/to hell with other road users attitude will not ingratiate him with Tory
selection committees in safe Tory seats)

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

Robin9 wrote:
Roland Perry;142220 Wrote:
In message , at 12:22:55
on Wed, 14 May 2014, David Cantrell remarked:--
What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities
and
why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?-

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using
it.-

Ah yes, the "South Circular"; once described as a 'collection of
signposts' rather than an actual road.
--
Roland Perry

I drove along part of the South Circular this afternoon, from Brixton
Hill to
Forest Hill. The road is quite inadequate for the volume of traffic.
TfL, of
course, have made matters worse by installing additional and unnecessary
traffic signals. (What else is new!)

Boris Johnson's balderdash suggestion might be appropriate for this
road. (His
tunnel-building proposal is general is mere publicity-seeking moonshine

designed solely to advance his career. He obviously realises that his
pro cycling/to hell with other road users attitude will not ingratiate him
with Tory selection committees in safe Tory seats)

Actually, I'm not so sure that London's cyclists regard Boris as
pro-cycling. And I doubt that potential safe Tory seats would select him or
not based on proposals like this. It's probably more of a case that he
wants to be seen doing something, but without having to actually start
anything during his remaining term in office.

That's interesting. I don't have cyclists in my normal circle so you
undoubtedly are more familiar with their opinion of Boris Johnson that I am.
I had assumed that his pro-cycling stance would have won their approval.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 13/05/2014 08:45, wrote:
In article ,
(Basil Jet) wrote:

On 2014\05\12 20:46, wrote:
In article ,
(David Walters) wrote:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...r-22mile-ringr
oad-tunnel-under-london-9354896.html

Plans to transform central London with a 22-mile-long
underground ring road can be revealed today.

Costing £30 billion to construct, it would remove tens of
thousands of cars from the crowded streets above.

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their localities
and why would it divert anything from the streets in central London?

This looks like 1960s car insanity to me, likely to generate a lot more
traffic.

It'll reduce jams on the M25 though! ;-)

Initially maybe but it would grow total traffic and jams would return very
soon. Did they learn nothing in the 1960s and 70s?

What was that "lesson"?

That traffic only flows freely when it has zero road space allocated to it?

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 14/05/2014 12:31, wrote:
In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:46:55PM -0500,
wrote:

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their
localities and why would it divert anything from the streets in
central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using it.

I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate new
traffic.


Or, as saner people describe it, they allow people to go where they
actually want to go, rather then where they have to settle for.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 16/05/2014 11:35, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:21:23
on Fri, 16 May 2014, David Cantrell remarked:
I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate new
traffic.

So do railways. So clearly it's pointless to build or upgrade railways
because they'll only get clogged up with pesky passengers.

Same with airports. Another runway or terminal, and all that happens is
more passengers clog them up.

Same with hospitals.

And new schools.

And even new housing.

They just fill up with new patients, new pupils and new occupants.

Colin must find it mystifying that we build anything at all.

Mayor sets out plan for 22-mile ring-road tunnel under London
 

On 2014\05\25 17:37, JNugent wrote:
On 14/05/2014 12:31, wrote:
In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:46:55PM -0500,
wrote:

What a hare-brained idea! What would the portals do to their
localities and why would it divert anything from the streets in
central London?

It would certainly make a big difference to the bits next to the
laughable south circular. That road is sufficiently awful that I often
find it quicker to just drive straight across London instead of using
it.

I don't think you have absorbed the lessons of how roads generate new
traffic.


Or, as saner people describe it, they allow people to go where they
actually want to go, rather then where they have to settle for.

applause