think I have done the right thing telling you all, you best check

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

As I said if Public Transport was better I'd gladly use my car less,

I'm not being bullied out of using my car it's my choice.

If your friends are so reliant on cars then frankly I'm sorry for them.

 

The Bus lanes in this area have actually helped Traffic flow more easily (Think how appaling Bullsmoor Lane was by the A10).

Plus the Bus lanes in Cheshunt have helped the flow of traffic in the area.

 

I take it now then with these wonderful camera's in the Congestion Zone that no untaxed cars are driving in London?.

Road humps slow Cars down in Residential area's,making it safer for people. If that has saved ONE person's life then it is worth the inconvenience.

 

Yes,i admit bus lanes are good for buses,but how can you have the cheek to say that installing a bus lane improves overall traffic.Bullsmore Lane was gridlocked for months whilst the road juction was repaired and a bus lane put in.Of course when it reopened,its going to be a lot better than when the road was being dug up,but its no faster thasn before the bus lane was installed.Believe me.I use that road every day.

 

Your missing my point on congestion cameras.I said that sort of technology COULD be used to eradicate illegal road users(if the will was there).I didn't say they were doing so at present.

 

The arguement of 'If it saves one life' doesn't wash.If everybody gave up private and public transport,thousands of lives would be saved each year.Anyway,speed humps are there to slow people down to the correct speed in residental area (although they have now spread to vast amounts of main roads).I agree with speed control(humps/cameras) in certain residential and school areas.At present i would say that 50% of humps on Britain roads are unneccessary or could be replaced by better methods of speed control.Humps smash car suspention,even at low speeds.Which in turn leads to unsafer cars.

[Arkwright]

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
So why should buses take priority over cars ? Who decided that? Bus lanes are inefficient.A two lane road will carry a bigger volume of people in any given hour,than one lane & a bus lane.FACT !

Buses may fly along their lanes at present,but they still get stuck in gridlock when they merge back in the traffic.With two lanes open,all trafiic would be freer flowing ,benifiting everyone.

Why shouldn't Buses take priority over Cars?. A Bus carrying 30+ people takes up a lot less room than the number of Cars carrying the same number of people.
I'm not a particular fan of Ken, BUT, the opposition tried to use the traffic argument at the last election for Mayor & he still won.
Seems the people who elected him are quite happy with the traffic in London.

[Arkwright]

Quote:

Boro Fan said:
Although, personally I'm an advocate of the no car tax and pay extra at the pump for mileage used idea.

Insurance could be issued as plastic with a bar code for swiping at the pump (no plastic no petrol) and with car chip added subsequently could be a foolproof secure method.

Also no plastic no MOT either.

Sounds reasonable to me.

[MbrunoB]

Those who want to avoid paying just find ways around what ever idea you come up with, It's not like they will worry about breaking another law!!!

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

Arkwright said:

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
So why should buses take priority over cars ? Who decided that? Bus lanes are inefficient.A two lane road will carry a bigger volume of people in any given hour,than one lane & a bus lane.FACT !

Buses may fly along their lanes at present,but they still get stuck in gridlock when they merge back in the traffic.With two lanes open,all trafiic would be freer flowing ,benifiting everyone.

Why shouldn't Buses take priority over Cars?. A Bus carrying 30+ people takes up a lot less room than the number of Cars carrying the same number of people.
I'm not a particular fan of Ken, BUT, the opposition tried to use the traffic argument at the last election for Mayor & he still won.
Seems the people who elected him are quite happy with the traffic in London.

A bus may carry 30+ people ,BUT only one bus uses that half of the road every 5-10 minutes.Where as hundreds of cars(and the bus) could use that same lane in that space of time.

[Tom S]

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
Yes,i admit bus lanes are good for buses,but how can you have the cheek to say that installing a bus lane improves overall traffic.

In simple terms the argument is that if you start with, say, 70 people in 70 cars and one bus in two lanes, and 20 people switch to the bus you are left with 50 cars in the one remaining lane. However that one lane actually moves more freely because cars are not having to pull out to pass the bus at the bus stops (or just because they're going faster). So it's a win-win situation. That's the theory anyway. It does rely on co-operation from the drivers.

[MbrunoB]

It's only at certain times that that bus will carry a full load of passengers yet the they have a seperate lane for periods when buses run empty.

[Arkwright]

Quote:

Brunob said:
It's only at certain times that that bus will carry a full load of passengers yet the they have a seperate lane for periods when buses run empty.

How often does a car carry a full load of passengers?, car sharing to & from work really would make a difference on the roads.

[The Invisible Man]

Bus lanes are a fine idea but for one small detail that the Powers That Be forgot.

 

You are supposed to have buses on them. Clean, quiet, comfortable, not overcrowded, cheap and above all frequent 21st century buses.

[MbrunoB]

Someone always has to spoil it and point out a vital fact.

 

I think buses should be FORCED to stay in the bus lane when they are operating and not swing out into the traffic , without looking, as they do when the bus in front takes a bit longer loading passengers.

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

Arkwright said:

Quote:

Brunob said:
It's only at certain times that that bus will carry a full load of passengers yet the they have a seperate lane for periods when buses run empty.

How often does a car carry a full load of passengers?, car sharing to & from work really would make a difference on the roads.

Even if every car had only one occupants.Many more people would travel down that lane in any given hour.Than would travel down that lane by bus.

[Arkwright]

Quote:

lovely stuff said:

Quote:

As I said if Public Transport was better I'd gladly use my car less,
I'm not being bullied out of using my car it's my choice.
If your friends are so reliant on cars then frankly I'm sorry for them.

The Bus lanes in this area have actually helped Traffic flow more easily (Think how appaling Bullsmoor Lane was by the A10).
Plus the Bus lanes in Cheshunt have helped the flow of traffic in the area.

I take it now then with these wonderful camera's in the Congestion Zone that no untaxed cars are driving in London?.
Road humps slow Cars down in Residential area's,making it safer for people. If that has saved ONE person's life then it is worth the inconvenience.

Yes,i admit bus lanes are good for buses,but how can you have the cheek to say that installing a bus lane improves overall traffic.Bullsmore Lane was gridlocked for months whilst the road juction was repaired and a bus lane put in.Of course when it reopened,its going to be a lot better than when the road was being dug up,but its no faster thasn before the bus lane was installed.Believe me.I use that road every day.

Your missing my point on congestion cameras.I said that sort of technology COULD be used to eradicate illegal road users(if the will was there).I didn't say they were doing so at present.

The arguement of 'If it saves one life' doesn't wash.If everybody gave up private and public transport,thousands of lives would be saved each year.Anyway,speed humps are there to slow people down to the correct speed in residental area (although they have now spread to vast amounts of main roads).I agree with speed control(humps/cameras) in certain residential and school areas.At present i would say that 50% of humps on Britain roads are unneccessary or could be replaced by better methods of speed control.Humps smash car suspention,even at low speeds.Which in turn leads to unsafer cars.

Where do yu get the figure that 50% of Speed Humps are uneccessary?.
The argument that if it saves one life does wash, it's about driving safer. Road humps make you drive slower & therefore God forbid that you should hit someone, but if you did then that person would have a greater chance of surviving.

I've been using the junction at Bullsmoor both as passenger & driver for 30 years, & it's never been as free flowing as it is now.

[Tom S]

Apologies if I've missed it, but you don't seem to have answered my point about those people who can't afford to run a car. Why should their journey be slowed down just so that you, who have the choice, can travel a bit more quickly?

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

Tom S said:

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
Yes,i admit bus lanes are good for buses,but how can you have the cheek to say that installing a bus lane improves overall traffic.

In simple terms the argument is that if you start with, say, 70 people in 70 cars and one bus in two lanes, and 20 people switch to the bus you are left with 50 cars in the one remaining lane. However that one lane actually moves more freely because cars are not having to pull out to pass the bus at the bus stops (or just because they're going faster). So it's a win-win situation. That's the theory anyway. It does rely on co-operation from the drivers.

So having half the road out of bounds,is preferable to waiting 15 seconds behind the bus as its pull in and out of a stop.I think your forgeting that the ouside lane would be unaffected by the bus stopping (bus lane or not).

I agree that bus lanes are benificial to buses.Please accept though, that they are big hinderence for cars.As car ownership and the population in general soars.Who in their right mind thinks its a better idea is to make a 50%many main roads,out of bounds for the majority of road users. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

[Tom S]

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
So having half the road out of bounds,is preferable to waiting 15 seconds behind the bus as its pull in and out of a stop.I think your forgeting that the ouside lane would be unaffected by the bus stopping (bus lane or not).

You know as well as I do that a fair proportion of drivers don't just wait 15 seconds at each stop. They try to muscle their way into the outside lane forcing that lane to slow down leading to a stop-start in both lanes.

You're still looking at this solely from the car driver's perspective. Transport planners have to consider everyone.

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

Arkwright said:

Quote:

lovely stuff said:

Quote:

As I said if Public Transport was better I'd gladly use my car less,
I'm not being bullied out of using my car it's my choice.
If your friends are so reliant on cars then frankly I'm sorry for them.

The Bus lanes in this area have actually helped Traffic flow more easily (Think how appaling Bullsmoor Lane was by the A10).
Plus the Bus lanes in Cheshunt have helped the flow of traffic in the area.

I take it now then with these wonderful camera's in the Congestion Zone that no untaxed cars are driving in London?.
Road humps slow Cars down in Residential area's,making it safer for people. If that has saved ONE person's life then it is worth the inconvenience.

Yes,i admit bus lanes are good for buses,but how can you have the cheek to say that installing a bus lane improves overall traffic.Bullsmore Lane was gridlocked for months whilst the road juction was repaired and a bus lane put in.Of course when it reopened,its going to be a lot better than when the road was being dug up,but its no faster thasn before the bus lane was installed.Believe me.I use that road every day.

Your missing my point on congestion cameras.I said that sort of technology COULD be used to eradicate illegal road users(if the will was there).I didn't say they were doing so at present.

The arguement of 'If it saves one life' doesn't wash.If everybody gave up private and public transport,thousands of lives would be saved each year.Anyway,speed humps are there to slow people down to the correct speed in residental area (although they have now spread to vast amounts of main roads).I agree with speed control(humps/cameras) in certain residential and school areas.At present i would say that 50% of humps on Britain roads are unneccessary or could be replaced by better methods of speed control.Humps smash car suspention,even at low speeds.Which in turn leads to unsafer cars.

Where do yu get the figure that 50% of Speed Humps are uneccessary?.
The argument that if it saves one life does wash, it's about driving safer. Road humps make you drive slower & therefore God forbid that you should hit someone, but if you did then that person would have a greater chance of surviving.

I've been using the junction at Bullsmoor both as passenger & driver for 30 years, & it's never been as free flowing as it is now.

Thats probably down to the lights at boths ends fazing differently now and staying green for longer.The highways agency probably done this to compensate for putting in a bus lane. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Also ,by your speed hump arguement,every stretch of the millions of miles of highwyas and byways in Britain,should be covered in speedhumps.Motorways could have 70mph speedhumps,every single piece of road should have a speed hump every 20 yards.Doing that would probably save some lives.right?

Speed humps are essential in certain areas,but local councils have gone into overkill in the last 10 years,its out of control.

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

Tom S said:

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
So having half the road out of bounds,is preferable to waiting 15 seconds behind the bus as its pull in and out of a stop.I think your forgeting that the ouside lane would be unaffected by the bus stopping (bus lane or not).

You know as well as I do that a fair proportion of drivers don't just wait 15 seconds at each stop. They try to muscle their way into the outside lane forcing that lane to slow down leading to a stop-start in both lanes.

You're still looking at this solely from the car driver's perspective. Transport planners have to consider everyone.

Thats all i want Tom.Equal Concideration.Not to have one form of transport favoured over another.

[Tom S]

Well at the moment, across the country as a whole (excluding the big cities) everything is loaded massively in favour of the car and has been ever since Beeching.

 

In the big cities you have to give public transport more because there simply isn't room for everyone to use cars.

 

Quote:

Thats all i want Tom.Equal Concideration.Not to have one form of transport favoured over another.

 

Quite frankly I don't think your arguments support that. But it's a good debate, conducted in the right spirit, and is better than working.

[lovely stuff]

What are you talking about?

cars and buses to have equal use of the roads.How is that not equal ?

[Tom S]

Your definition of 'equal treatment' would leave London totally clogged but you're too blinkered to see it. We NEED to stop non-essential car use so that the essential users can get through.

 

An effective policy is far more desirable than one that meets your definition of 'equal' but prevents anyone from moving.