TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Mortimer wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

I used the Westway in both directions yesterday and noticed no
diminuation in traffic capacity compared to their previous status.
In fact the only change I saw was in the designation and numbering
of the road and the consequent alteration in the direction sign
colour.

What is your evidence that there has been any such diminuation? Is
there any point to your ranting other than to poitlessly and
unjustifiably castigate Livingstone?

Have you seen the former M41 (with nearly half the road space
snaffled for other purposes)?

I know of no road, either now nor previously, designated as the
"M41".

It's the short spur (probably only about a mile) from the A40
southwards to Shepherd's Bush roundabout.

I thought it was the A41(M). Thanks for the correction.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

John Rowland wrote:
Mortimer wrote:

Shepherd's Bush roundabout.

Holland Park Roundabout!

Indeed, I'd always heard it referred to as Shepherd's Bush roundabout.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Brimstone wrote:

Mortimer wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

I used the Westway in both directions yesterday and noticed no
diminuation in traffic capacity compared to their previous status.
In fact the only change I saw was in the designation and numbering
of the road and the consequent alteration in the direction sign
colour.

What is your evidence that there has been any such diminuation? Is
there any point to your ranting other than to poitlessly and
unjustifiably castigate Livingstone?

Have you seen the former M41 (with nearly half the road space
snaffled for other purposes)?

I know of no road, either now nor previously, designated as the
"M41".

It's the short spur (probably only about a mile) from the A40
southwards to Shepherd's Bush roundabout.

I thought it was the A41(M). Thanks for the correction.

There *was* an A41(M) elsewhere - in the line of the A41, bypassing Tring.

It was opened to traffic (IIRC) in the mid-1970s. It too was later
downgraded, along with the plans for a motorway from NW London out
through N Bucks (the same M41 which passed from Shepherds Bush to the
Westway flyoiver). The norhern sretch of that road was presumably
abandoned because of the decision to contruct the M40 through to the
Midlands instead, though a new stretch of A41 was built from the Hemel
area through to somewhere near Aylesbury. The former Tring bypass
motorway was incorprated into it - you can easily tell when you are on
that bit.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Brimstone wrote:

John Rowland wrote:
Mortimer wrote:
Shepherd's Bush roundabout.
Holland Park Roundabout!

Indeed, I'd always heard it referred to as Shepherd's Bush roundabout.

Ditto.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Richard J. wrote:

Then they were reclassified as non-motorways precisely so that Mad Ken
could get his grubby mitts on them

Actually it was in order to have a sensible division of responsibilities
between Transport for London and the DfT/Highways Agency. It wouldn't have
made much sense, for example, to have the DfT responsible for a few miles of
isolated motorway in West London on routes which were otherwise being
transferred to TfL. Still, I guess it's more satisfying for you to make
cheap jokes about the previous Mayor.

Hello, Ken.

Why are you posting under a bogus name?

Still, can't blame you, I suppose.

and downgrade the speed limits,

... in the case of ex-A40(M) to the design speed of the road, and improving
the traffic-flow efficiency at peak times too, so what's your problem with
that?

The A40(M) speed limit used to be 50 on the 2-lane stretch and 60 on the
three-lane stretch. What are they now?

The speed limit reductions I was thinking of were mainluy on the former
A102 at Bow and the A102(M) just north of that (now A12) where a
six-lane highway with hard shoulders is limited to 40mph. Oh, and th
southbound continuation heading for Kent has been reduced from a 60
limit to a 50.

Ex-A40(M) is still 6 lanes; don't know about A102(M);

Speed limit curtailed to an unrealistically low 40 (this on a road which
is a motorway in all but name and part of which used to be a motorway).

M41 reduced from 6 to
4 in order, I think, to incorporate the junction for the Westfield Centre
(White City), but this hasn't affected traffic-flow efficiency as the
roundabouts at each end are the limiting factor.

And the hard shoulders?

What local junction needs two strips of land 27' wide and a mile long?

There are now buildings on part of the west side of the former M41,
where the hard shoulder used to be.

See above for the reason. No part of M3 or M40 is within Greater London, by
the way.

I didn't think the M3 was (hence my question mark - the Surrey boundary
is always a mystery to me). The point where the A40 becomes the M40 must
be very close to the Bucks boundary - touch and go.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

JNugent wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

and downgrade the speed limits,

... in the case of ex-A40(M) to the design speed of the road, and
improving the traffic-flow efficiency at peak times too, so what's
your problem with that?

The A40(M) speed limit used to be 50 on the 2-lane stretch and 60 on
the three-lane stretch. What are they now?

The speed limit reductions I was thinking of were mainluy on the
former A102 at Bow and the A102(M) just north of that (now A12) where
a six-lane highway with hard shoulders is limited to 40mph. Oh, and th
southbound continuation heading for Kent has been reduced from a 60
limit to a 50.

Ex-A40(M) is still 6 lanes; don't know about A102(M);

Speed limit curtailed to an unrealistically low 40 (this on a road
which is a motorway in all but name and part of which used to be a
motorway).
M41 reduced from 6 to
4 in order, I think, to incorporate the junction for the Westfield
Centre (White City), but this hasn't affected traffic-flow
efficiency as the roundabouts at each end are the limiting factor.

And the hard shoulders?

What local junction needs two strips of land 27' wide and a mile long?

The total length of the junction between the starting points of the two exit
slip roads is 0.44 mile (measured on Google Earth) out of a total ex-M41
length of about 0.75 mile. The slip roads are all 2-lane. (Westfield is a
*very* big shopping centre.)


There are now buildings on part of the west side of the former M41,
where the hard shoulder used to be.

The only building is the southbound platform structure of the new Shepherd's
Bush station on the West London Line, right at the southern end of the
ex-M41. Then through the new junction you have 4 lanes of A3220 and 4 lanes
of slip roads, with no hard shoulders. The north-facing slip roads continue
right up to the point where the carriageways separate for the approach to
the Northern Roundabout, and from there it has always been 2-lane. The only
reason for building 3-lane carriageways was as part of the full Motorway
Box.

How else would you have accommodated road traffic for the Westfield Centre
without "wrecking" the road?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

JNugent wrote:
line.

They used to be motorways and had the traffic-flow efficiencies of that
category.

Then they were reclassified as non-motorways precisely so that Mad Ken
could get his grubby mitts on them and downgrade the speed limits,
narrow them, or anything else of the sort of thing you'd expexct from
him (he never had authority over any of the London motorways - eg, M1,
M3(?), M4, M40, M11 - except the ones which were nobbled and handed over
to him.

Classified motorways are generally looked after by the DoT or its
contractors. A roads can also be maintained on this model particularly
outside urban areas, but more often are devolved to the local authority
to look after.

--
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

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Richard J. wrote:
JNugent wrote:

There are now buildings on part of the west side of the former M41,
where the hard shoulder used to be.

The only building is the southbound platform structure of the new
Shepherd's Bush station on the West London Line, right at the
southern end of the ex-M41. Then through the new junction you have 4
lanes of A3220 and 4 lanes of slip roads, with no hard shoulders. The
north-facing slip roads continue right up to the point where the
carriageways separate for the approach to the Northern Roundabout,
and from there it has always been 2-lane. The only reason for
building 3-lane carriageways was as part of the full Motorway Box.

How else would you have accommodated road traffic for the Westfield
Centre without "wrecking" the road?

I would have built a new 2+2 road from Wood Lane to Holland Park roundabout
through the development site, and linked the access roads to that. I would
then have made the west side of the green two-way, opened the bus-only cut
through on the east side of the green to all traffic, made the connection
from the green to the roundabout bus/taxi/cycle only, probably one lane each
way. This would make the green into a nice place to sunbathe or shop.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

On 20 Aug, 02:32, "John Rowland"
wrote:
How else would you have accommodated road traffic for the Westfield
Centre without "wrecking" the road?

I would have built a new 2+2 road from Wood Lane to Holland Park roundabout
through the development site, and linked the access roads to that. I would
then have made the west side of the green two-way, opened the bus-only cut
through on the east side of the green to all traffic, made the connection
from the green to the roundabout bus/taxi/cycle only, probably one lane each
way. This would make the green into a nice place to sunbathe or shop.

That would have been an excellent plan - but would doubtless have made
JNugent's head explode with rage.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 01:37:55 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote:

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

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

--
Only some ghastly, dehumanised moron would want to get rid of the Routemaster.
Ken Livingstone 2001.

PeterT - "Reply to" address is a spam trap - all replies to the group please