|
Post by vjaska on Jan 27, 2016 15:11:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by westhamgeezer on Jan 27, 2016 16:55:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Jan 27, 2016 18:13:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Jan 27, 2016 18:15:15 GMT
Oh yes it could. "All vehicles banned except bycycles" And I'm not joking
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jan 27, 2016 18:29:17 GMT
Totally agree. travelled through Bow on Sunday and boi did I regret it. To dismantle the flyover is to dismantle (in my eyes) one of the Bus Priority Schemes as the 25 uses this to improve service. But I guess that the 25 may not be the same route by the time the Flyover comes down.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 27, 2016 19:14:37 GMT
It wouldn't surprise me at all, a lot of flyovers and underpass's are relics from a bygone age.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Jan 27, 2016 21:17:22 GMT
Totally agree. travelled through Bow on Sunday and boi did I regret it. To dismantle the flyover is to dismantle (in my eyes) one of the Bus Priority Schemes as the 25 uses this to improve service. But I guess that the 25 may not be the same route by the time the Flyover comes down. It was only recently that the 25 started using the flyover, such a shame as this significantly helped the route's reliability. Now the 25 will be back to dealing with the congestion in the area amidst all the road users all because of this heavy emphasis on cyclists unless something radical will be undertaken. Funnily enough, on the subject of cyclists, I have just witnessed an incident between a cyclist and a car driver along New Oxford Street which the former instigated. Anyway, I digress.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 27, 2016 22:34:47 GMT
Totally agree. travelled through Bow on Sunday and boi did I regret it. To dismantle the flyover is to dismantle (in my eyes) one of the Bus Priority Schemes as the 25 uses this to improve service. But I guess that the 25 may not be the same route by the time the Flyover comes down. Even ignoring the 25's use of the flyover, the area would sadly become even more gridlocked than now as all traffic would have the negotiate the junction rather than sail over it.
|
|
|
Post by wivenswold on Jan 27, 2016 22:36:02 GMT
It sounds crazy but this could be one of those counter-intuitive things that actually work. Removing the roundabout and flyover, slowing down the flow but decreasing journey time.
Do feel free to rip that notion to shreds though. It's off the top of my rather tired head and based on absolutely no science.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 27, 2016 22:38:17 GMT
It wouldn't surprise me at all, a lot of flyovers and underpass's are relics from a bygone age. Sorry but they provide an important process of keeping traffic moving. If you removed the Croydon Underpass, then Croydon traffic would increase significantly and the bus only lane would have to be removed so hardly progress. Remove the flyovers and underpasses on the A13 and that notoriously busy road would get worse.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 28, 2016 4:36:25 GMT
It wouldn't surprise me at all, a lot of flyovers and underpass's are relics from a bygone age. Sorry but they provide an important process of keeping traffic moving. If you removed the Croydon Underpass, then Croydon traffic would increase significantly and the bus only lane would have to be removed so hardly progress. Remove the flyovers and underpasses on the A13 and that notoriously busy road would get worse. I believe there are plans afoot to do just that with Croydon underpass, also to remove the Hammersmith flyover and replace it with a tunnel?
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Jan 28, 2016 10:21:14 GMT
Sorry but they provide an important process of keeping traffic moving. If you removed the Croydon Underpass, then Croydon traffic would increase significantly and the bus only lane would have to be removed so hardly progress. Remove the flyovers and underpasses on the A13 and that notoriously busy road would get worse. I believe there are plans afoot to do just that with Croydon underpass, also to remove the Hammersmith flyover and replace it with a tunnel? I'd like to know how far back it will start as the U/G is just underneath it? "I know oh great one of TFL c*ck ups, we'll put a level crossing in the tunnel." I can't wait to see the plans for this!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 28, 2016 11:34:23 GMT
I believe there are plans afoot to do just that with Croydon underpass, also to remove the Hammersmith flyover and replace it with a tunnel? I'd like to know how far back it will start as the U/G is just underneath it? "I know oh great one of TFL c*ck ups, we'll put a level crossing in the tunnel." I can't wait to see the plans for this! Err the tunnel plan was promoted by the Tory led Hammersmith and Fulham council. The current Labour run council seems rather less keen. The major problem is how on earth you get vehicles in and out at junctions given the size of portals and ramps that would be needed. The flyover is hardly "nice" but it's there and has had tens of millions spent on it. The whole idea of more road tunnels in London is bonkers anyway as they would do nothing for congestion and I can't see local councils and residents agreeing to demolition of homes and businesses to provide access points into the City. Until we find a way of reducing traffic flows in West London then I fear you'll always have the Hammersmith flyover.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Jan 28, 2016 11:58:09 GMT
I'd like to know how far back it will start as the U/G is just underneath it? "I know oh great one of TFL c*ck ups, we'll put a level crossing in the tunnel." I can't wait to see the plans for this! Err the tunnel plan was promoted by the Tory led Hammersmith and Fulham council. The current Labour run council seems rather less keen. The major problem is how on earth you get vehicles in and out at junctions given the size of portals and ramps that would be needed. The flyover is hardly "nice" but it's there and has had tens of millions spent on it. The whole idea of more road tunnels in London is bonkers anyway as they would do nothing for congestion and I can't see local councils and residents agreeing to demolition of homes and businesses to provide access points into the City. Until we find a way of reducing traffic flows in West London then I fear you'll always have the Hammersmith flyover. I remember reading many years ago that the width of the M4 elevated section was restricted by the buildings either side of the A4. One proposal was to build a double decker section, but was turned down on costs. If only............
|
|
|
Post by Hassaan on Jan 31, 2016 15:36:47 GMT
It wouldn't surprise me at all, a lot of flyovers and underpass's are relics from a bygone age. Sorry but they provide an important process of keeping traffic moving. If you removed the Croydon Underpass, then Croydon traffic would increase significantly and the bus only lane would have to be removed so hardly progress. Remove the flyovers and underpasses on the A13 and that notoriously busy road would get worse. Remember that on the A13 the Prince Regent Lane and Movers Lane underpasses were built this century, only being completed in 2004. The Beckton flyover replaced an old one that only existed in one direction, while Canning Town flyover was widened. East of Goresbrook Interchange it is a completely new alignment (named Thames Gateway) completed in 1999. However, I think he was referring to structures like the Lodge Avenue flyover, which is single carriageway with 4 narrow lanes and steep ramps at both ends. It was built as a temporary structure in the 1970s but there still appear to be no firm plans to replace it.
|
|