TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Ed Banger wrote:
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.



Who now sinks when he tries to walk on water!

--
Moving things in still pictures!

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Richard J. wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:
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.

But you actually went on to say ...

the evidence is that traffic lights make things worse

So, if they make things worse, what do you think their useful purpose is?

To create congestion and pollution, thus providing a big stick to beat
the motorist with for his or her wicked ways. It's also a good excuse to
justify further taxation of the motorist because of the said pollution
and congestion they cause. It's nothing to do with the possibility that
someone involved with the planning side of things is in cahoots with
the people who make traffic lights.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Richard J. wrote:

But you actually went on to say ...

the evidence is that traffic lights make things worse

So, if they make things worse, what do you think their useful purpose is?

Traffic lights can, if used sensibly, alleviate problems at some
interchanges and serve a useful function in ramp metering. They are not
a universal panacea but that is how they have been treated by the lazy
and incompetent.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Brimstone wrote:

The Hanger Lane underpass long predates the gyratory which sits on
top of it. The underpass is shown on a very early 60s A-Z map of
London.

Was it lengthened when the gyratory was put in? It seems too long to have
been built just to go under a crossroads.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

On 17 Aug, 21:53, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
But you actually went on to say ...

the evidence is that traffic lights make things worse

So, if they make things worse, what do you think their useful purpose is?

Traffic lights can, if used sensibly, alleviate problems at some
interchanges and serve a useful function in ramp metering. They are not
a universal panacea but that is how they have been treated by the lazy
and incompetent.

I find them useful because they make motorists drive in convoys with
gaps between the convoys where people can cross the road without fear
of being killed. The alternative seems to be an endless stream of
traffic which makes crossing the road virtually impossible or else
means waiting a long, long time.

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

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

(Of traffic lights)

I find them useful because they make motorists drive in convoys with
gaps between the convoys where people can cross the road without fear of
being killed. The alternative seems to be an endless stream of traffic
which makes crossing the road virtually impossible or else means waiting
a long, long time.

Aren't cyclists "traffic", then?

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

John Rowland wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

The Hanger Lane underpass long predates the gyratory which sits on
top of it. The underpass is shown on a very early 60s A-Z map of
London.

Was it lengthened when the gyratory was put in? It seems too long to
have been built just to go under a crossroads.

Nope, it is as it has always been. If you look at a plan view of the
gyratory, you'll see that it is to the north of the A40 and its underpass.
Even before the gyratory was built, the junction was a large one.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed TrafficFlows
 

John Rowland wrote:

Brimstone wrote:

The Hanger Lane underpass long predates the gyratory which sits on
top of it. The underpass is shown on a very early 60s A-Z map of
London.

Was it lengthened when the gyratory was put in? It seems too long to have
been built just to go under a crossroads.

It is as long as it is due to the need for its depth to be greater than
normal because it passes under "the built environment" (ie, it is more
of a tunnel than a cut and cover underpass) and because of the need to
keep the approach gradients as low as possible.

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

In message , JNugent
writes

"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's the Thamesmead-Erith spine road (Bronze Way), opened in 1997,
but the A23 Coulsdon By-bass, opened about 18 months ago, is the only
one built in the last decade that I recall.
--
Paul Terry

TfL Admits Livingstone Regime Deliberately Obstructed Traffic Flows
 

Doug wrote:

I find them useful because they make motorists drive in convoys

Oh indeed we all know that your concept is that anything that
inconveniences the motorist must be a good thing.