Roadbuilding Plans for East Mids.

iiiiDougiiii said:

https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/331232.html

Here is a list of roadbuilding plans for the E. Midlands, for
information and the preparation of opposition.....Climate change will
never be tackled whilst we pour more tarmac over the land to encourage
traffic!

Here are the major road plans for our region, from Highways Agency
sources....we are researching, and preparing to oppose! The M1
Widening is the most controversial at the moment. Bear in mind also
this is just the "major* road schemes....

Strikes me that these are improvements to existing roads, in places that
constantly feature on local radio traffic reports as having jams. Surely, if
traffic flow is improved, fuel efficiency is improved, and pollution
reduced. Then the cars will use the new roads, and leave the old ones to me
& my bike.
--

Martin Bulmer

If only

"Martin Bulmer" wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Strikes me that these are improvements to existing roads, in places that
constantly feature on local radio traffic reports as having jams. Surely,
if
traffic flow is improved, fuel efficiency is improved, and pollution
reduced. Then the cars will use the new roads, and leave the old ones to
me
& my bike.

"Martin Bulmer" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Strikes me that these are improvements to existing roads, in places

that

Quoted message said:

constantly feature on local radio traffic reports as having jams.

Surely, if

Quoted message said:

traffic flow is improved, fuel efficiency is improved, and

pollution

Quoted message said:

reduced. Then the cars will use the new roads,

Which points out that motorists will use the fastest route. If a
parallel railway line appeared that was faster yet, the motorists
might stop being motorists, and the jams might vanish while neither
building new roads, nor widening old ones.

As with Martin's cycling road, the best way to improve a road might
be to spend money on its competition

Jeremy Parker

POHB said:

If only

"Martin Bulmer" wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Strikes me that these are improvements to existing roads, in places that
constantly feature on local radio traffic reports as having jams. Surely,
if
traffic flow is improved, fuel efficiency is improved, and pollution
reduced. Then the cars will use the new roads, and leave the old ones to
me
& my bike.

It's worked in some places. The "old" A419 at Latton is now a quiet TT
course, and 20 years ago I learned to drive on the "old" A34.

Zog The Undeniable wrote on Thursday 12 January 2006 18:59:

Quoted message said:

20 years ago I learned to drive on the "old" A34.

Was that the old A34 before the new A34 was built?

--
Regards
Alex
The From address above is a spam-trap.
The Reply-To address is valid

iiiiDougiiii said:

https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/01/331232.html

Here is a list of roadbuilding plans for the E. Midlands, for
information and the preparation of opposition.....Climate change will
never be tackled whilst we pour more tarmac over the land to encourage
traffic!

Wonderful list, I assume. I'm writing this as I'm at Bond Street,
where I can change to the Jubilee line. As the emergency services dont get
radio down here I doubt I'll be able to get t'internet.

Quoted message said:

Here are the major road plans for our region, from Highways Agency
sources....we are researching, and preparing to oppose! The M1 Widening
is the most controversial at the moment. Bear in mind also this is just
the "major* road schemes....

I agree, should be a new, seperate motorway, in which case a problem on
one wouldn't affect the other, just like the M6.

Combine that with easy-access large free carparks and fast, secure, safe,
clean, competitive, well lit, reliable 24/7 park and ride in to London,
with dynamic information signs on the motorway (e.g. "avoid P&R today
folks, Thameslink is stuffed"😉 and you (should be) onto a winner.

Quoted message said:

Wonderful list, I assume. I'm writing this as I'm at Bond Street,
where I can change to the Jubilee line. As the emergency services dont get
radio down here I doubt I'll be able to get t'internet.

Quoted message said:

Here are the major road plans for our region, from Highways Agency
sources....we are researching, and preparing to oppose! The M1 Widening
is the most controversial at the moment. Bear in mind also this is just
the "major* road schemes....

I agree, should be a new, seperate motorway, in which case a problem on
one wouldn't affect the other, just like the M6.

Here we go again lots of different options.

Lot's of options like this, either unpopular (toll road) or impractical
(widening), seem to be the standard New Labour tactic for transport
projects. Sure does hold things up and puts off actually doing
anything.

It's funny how they always come up with a firm but useless proposal
first and then 'surprise surprise' after all the complaints they open
things up for consultation - nice delaying tactic.

M6 toll road, Cambridge busway, Maglev and Crossrail proposals all
going nowhere then eventually, three years later, we end up back in
consultation.

I can't think of a single major transport project (road or rail) that
New Labour have actually kicked off since they came into power. Oh yes,
there's always plenty of talk though.

Quoted message said:

Lot's of options like this, either unpopular (toll road) or impractical
(widening), seem to be the standard New Labour tactic for transport
projects. Sure does hold things up and puts off actually doing
anything.

It's funny how they always come up with a firm but useless proposal
first and then 'surprise surprise' after all the complaints they open
things up for consultation - nice delaying tactic.

In this case it's actually quite a cunning tactic. They're talking like a
new M6 Toll road is a serious proposition, in order that the
environmentalists get up in arms and demand that the existing road is
widened instead.

Then you have a road widening scheme that the environmentalists are actually
in favour of -- ingenious!!

iiiiDougiiii said:

For general info on roads and how to fight them, contact "Road Block"

In actual fact I'm in favour of roads.
1. I do most of my cycling on them.
2 Most of my food is delivered by trucks using them.
3. They are useful for public transport. Better roads mean bus journeys
are faster and more predictable.
4 When the supply of anything else is too low, ie hospitals, water, the
answer is to increase the supply. Same should apply to roads.
5 Where through traffic is diverted off local roads onto a motorway
then the existing roads are more pleasant for local users including
cyclists.
I would support measures to reduce unnecessary driving for
example abolishing fixed costs like vehicle excise duty and purchase
tax and instead increasing the duty on fuel. Combine that with
restrictions in certain areas like city centres by increasing parking
charges etc.
But other than that the sooner that substandard roads like the M6
are improved the better. Roll on the M74 extension in Glasgow.
Iain

Quoted message said:

4 When the supply of anything else is too low, ie hospitals, water, the
answer is to increase the supply. Same should apply to roads.

The main difference is that in the examples you give, supply rises to meet
demand, with roads it is the other way round. Nice clear, newly built roads
are usually running at or above capacity within a few years, and that's
ignoring the factors such as increased population.

Graeme

Graeme Dods said:

Quoted message said:

4 When the supply of anything else is too low, ie hospitals, water, the
answer is to increase the supply. Same should apply to roads.

The main difference is that in the examples you give, supply rises to meet
demand, with roads it is the other way round. Nice clear, newly built roads
are usually running at or above capacity within a few years, and that's
ignoring the factors such as increased population.

That seems to me symptomatic of suppressed demand. There never have
been enough roads so they are always soon filled up.

Anyone know how the average mileage/motorist has changed over the last
10 years? New roads should result in an increase in mileage if your
theory is right.

--
AnthonyL

Graeme Dods said:

Quoted message said:

4 When the supply of anything else is too low, ie hospitals, water, the
answer is to increase the supply. Same should apply to roads.

The main difference is that in the examples you give, supply rises to meet
demand, with roads it is the other way round. Nice clear, newly built roads
are usually running at or above capacity within a few years, and that's
ignoring the factors such as increased population.

Not in ever case. For example the M74, the motorway linking Scotland to
England has been open for years and outside the Glasgow area where
local traffic increases volumes is still running freely. In my view key
roads like the M6/M1 etc should have enough capacity built so the
there is good links between different parts of the country.
If increased traffic generation was a reason not to build more
roads then we'd still be travelling from Glasgow on London on cart
tracks.

Iain

Quoted message said:

If increased traffic generation was a reason not to build more
roads then we'd still be travelling from Glasgow on London on cart
tracks.

No, we wouldn't. We'd take the train.

R.

AnthonyL said:

Graeme Dods said:

Quoted message said:

4 When the supply of anything else is too low, ie hospitals, water, the
answer is to increase the supply. Same should apply to roads.

The main difference is that in the examples you give, supply rises to meet
demand, with roads it is the other way round. Nice clear, newly built roads
are usually running at or above capacity within a few years, and that's
ignoring the factors such as increased population.

That seems to me symptomatic of suppressed demand. There never have
been enough roads so they are always soon filled up.

I don't have the refs but in some cases this does not seem to be
completely true. Some traffic just seems to disappear if the facility
vanishes for a while and then reappears. I think this was first noticed
in London when one of the Thames bridges was under repair. IIRC and
it's been some time since I read the articles. The London planners
anticipated very heavy preassure on alternate routes which did not
appear. Then to their surprise the volume of traffic on the bridge did
not return to its previous level upon the completion of the roadwork.
I don't remember how long after the re-opening that the article was
published.

So it looks like while you could say that the demand is there it
appears to be highly discretionary.

Quoted message said:

Anyone know how the average mileage/motorist has changed over the last
10 years? New roads should result in an increase in mileage if your
theory is right.

Figures from Scotland (First I found)
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2004/08/27100257

These figures suggest a considerable increase over what one would
expect from population (and economic?) growth

Road traffic (chapter 6):

· There were greater volumes of traffic in 2003 than in
any previous year, 1 per cent more than in 2002, and 18 per
cent more than in 1993 (the first year for which the
Department for Transport has estimated total traffic on
Scottish roads).

· Motorway traffic was estimated to have increased by 34
per cent since 1993 - much more rapid growth than on trunk
A roads (21 per cent) and non-trunk A roads (13 per cent).
Traffic on minor roads rose by 15 per cent between 1993 and
2003.

Quoted message said:

In this case it's actually quite a cunning tactic. They're talking like a
new M6 Toll road is a serious proposition, in order that the
environmentalists get up in arms and demand that the existing road is
widened instead.

Then you have a road widening scheme that the environmentalists are actually
in favour of -- ingenious!!

Trouble is, the widening scheme is a non starter.

It will cause chaos for years as such a busy road would require large
scale lane closures due to the safety requirements of those doing the
work. Probably take too long and therefore provide little in the way of
relief given the rate of traffic growth.

The toll road is not a serious proposition for New Labour as it would
be very unpopular with the locals. However, importantly, it could be
built using private capital and, unlike the widening scheme, wouldn't
cost the DfT anything, a major consideration.

The main requirement for New Labour is to not spend money on transport
whilst there is still so much to be done expanding the pet projects of
the New Left (race, gender, community, nanny state, sexual orientation
etc etc).

So their best option (from their perspective) is to do nothing.

Richard said:

Quoted message said:

If increased traffic generation was a reason not to build more
roads then we'd still be travelling from Glasgow on London on cart
tracks.

No, we wouldn't. We'd take the train.

So it's OK to supercede tracks by building railways but not by building
roads?.

iain

Quoted message said:

Richard said:

Quoted message said:

If increased traffic generation was a reason not to build more
roads then we'd still be travelling from Glasgow on London on cart
tracks.

No, we wouldn't. We'd take the train.

So it's OK to supercede tracks by building railways but not by building
roads?.

Eh? Who said anything about superceding tracks? (whatever that might
mean).

R.

allan tracy said:

The main requirement for New Labour is to not spend money on transport
whilst there is still so much to be done expanding the pet projects of
the New Left (race, gender, community, nanny state, sexual orientation
etc etc).

So their best option (from their perspective) is to do nothing.

You missed out trolling...

Simon

Quoted message said:

iiiiDougiiii said:

For general info on roads and how to fight them, contact "Road Block"

In actual fact I'm in favour of roads.
1. I do most of my cycling on them.
2 Most of my food is delivered by trucks using them.
3. They are useful for public transport. Better roads mean bus journeys
are faster and more predictable.
4 When the supply of anything else is too low, ie hospitals, water, the
answer is to increase the supply. Same should apply to roads.

What about the supply of recreational drugs? Some people are addicted
to car use.

Quoted message said:

5 Where through traffic is diverted off local roads onto a motorway
then the existing roads are more pleasant for local users including
cyclists.

Diverted traffic invariably encounters another bottleneck further on
down the road.

Quoted message said:

I would support measures to reduce unnecessary driving for
example abolishing fixed costs like vehicle excise duty and purchase
tax and instead increasing the duty on fuel. Combine that with
restrictions in certain areas like city centres by increasing parking
charges etc.

The car lobby won't stand for it. Why not just limit the supply of
roads? Congestion is the best and simplest deterrent to unnecessary
driving.

Quoted message said:

But other than that the sooner that substandard roads like the M6
are improved the better. Roll on the M74 extension in Glasgow.

So you really want to encourage more traffic?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
The only opposition is on the streets.