Forum Topic

"Roads in West London feature in list of where drivers lose most time to traffic".

Errr....That should be Roads in West London where too many cars and too much driving cause the most traffic surely?Or to repeat a mantra, you're not stuck in traffic you ARE traffic...https://neighbournet.com/server/common/contrans019.htm

Paul James ● 217d58 Comments

  🤣

Rosco White ● 209d

Wow Philippa, you are so wounding. If it came from someone who wasn’t totally loopy it might’ve been an insult.

Simon Hayes ● 209d

@ Simon  I should think!

Philippa Bond ● 209d

"The cost of running a nationised industry is paid for by its customers in the same way as in a privatised one.  The difference is that any profits resulting go to the public purse rather than private dividends." (27/06/24 16:50:00 Philippa Bond)How well/wisely will that public purse be used? Here in Labour run Ealing Council, they cannot, it seems even put up the correct public notice board for the correct parliamentary constituency, for the fortcoming general election.Today, 27/06/2024, on the pedestrianised part of Melbourne Avenue W13, Labour run Ealing Council put up a notice board for the Ealing North constituency. Melbourne Avenue/Sainsbury's are within the Walpole Ward which is in the Ealing Southall constituency. The usual ineptness from Labour run Ealing Council, all in the name of providing public services in an "open honest and transparent way".INEPT LABOUR RUN EALING COUNCIL HAVE FINALLY CORRECTED THEIR EARLIER INDIFFERENCE AND CARELESSNESS, IN RUNNING PUBLIC SERVICES. NOW (02/07/2024), ON THE PEDESRIANISED PART OF MELBOURNE AVENUE, THERE IS THE CORRECT EALING SOUTHALL CONSTITUENCY PUBLIC NOTICE, AND NOT THE EALING NORTH ONE. AFTER ALL, MELBOURNE AVENUE W13 FALLS WITHIN THE EALING SOUTHALL CONSTITUENCY AND NOT THE EALING NORTH ONE.WELL DONE FOR FINALLY GETTING THAT RIGHT - INEPT LABOUR RUN EALING COUNCIL, AND ITS DEMOCRATIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

Anthony Hawran ● 211d

"The cost of running a nationised industry is paid for by its customers in the same way as in a privatised one.  The difference is that any profits resulting go to the public purse rather than private dividends." (27/06/24 16:50:00 Philippa Bond)How well/wisely will that public purse be used? Here in Labour run Ealing Council, they cannot, it seems even put up the correct public notice board for the correct parliamentary constituency, for the fortcoming general election.Today, 27/06/2024, on the pedestrianised part of Melbourne Avenue W13, Labour run Ealing Council put up a notice board for the Ealing North constituency. Melbourne Avenue/Sainsbury's are within the Walpole Ward which is in the Ealing Southall constituency. The usual ineptness from Labour run Ealing Council, all in the name of providing public services in an "open honest and transparent way".INEPT LABOUR RUN EALING COUNCIL HAVE FINALLY CORRECTED THEIR EARLIER INDIFFERENCE AND CARELESSNESS, IN RUNNING PUBLIC SERVICES. NOW (02/07/2024), ON THE PEDESRIANISED PART OF MELBOURNE AVENUE, THERE IS THE CORRECT EALING SOUTHALL CONSTITUENCY PUBLIC NOTICE, AND NOT THE EALING NORTH ONE. AFTER ALL, MELBOURNE AVENUE W13 FALLS WITHIN THE EALING SOUTHALL CONSTITUENCY AND NOT THE EALING NORTH ONE.WELL DONE FOR FINALLY GETTING THAT RIGHT - INEPT LABOUR RUN EALING COUNCIL, AND ITS DEMOCRATIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

Anthony Hawran ● 211d

? Who or what’s that directed to PB?

Peter Yale ● 211d

So you have a Been There Done That and now stop everyone else from doing it attitude by making it too dangerous and hogging the roads?

Philippa Bond ● 211d

Ben/Paul  -  encouraging, NOT forcing, or trying to.Cyclists fanatics way or nothing

Peter Yale ● 211d

Sadly, they will get as much support as the thousands of car parts and accessories shops that have closed due to the non DIY nature of current car maintenance.  None at all.

N V Brooks ● 211d

Meanwhile the cycling retailers are struggling…https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2024/02/09/bicycle-association-seeks-government-support-to-halt-continuum-of-decline-as-uk-cycle-sales-slump-to-39-year-low/

Simon Hayes ● 212d

The Shell and Esso 'gestures' are merely that,  a sop to the cyclists from organisations that earn $Billions in revenue from the sale of fossil fuels. If cyclists are gullible enough to fall for this then more fool them.The Esso car share 'sop' is conditional on buying Esso fuel ten times before 31 October to earn a "whopping" £10 worth on Nectar points. I will save more than that by shopping around for fuel where, locally, there can be as much as 25p/litre difference  between to most and the least expensive,

N V Brooks ● 212d

Oh yes, I’m sure those comps would love to see their profits dwindle.You kiss the pony yet again Ben. Only a tiny minority of London residents regularly cycle for anything other than leisure. Why not ask your neighbours how often they cycle and why. You’d soon get the idea, old chap.

Simon Hayes ● 212d

Nigel, Peter and Simon, you do know that other cycling organisations exist, not that I am a paid up member of any of them, and some of them are even sponsored by oil companies!Shell are encouraging everyone to sign up to British Cycling by offering them £10.00 off an annual membership to British Cycling if you sign up through their app or website.Esso has also launched a new initiative called 'Thoughtful Driving.' They are offering up to £30 (in Nectar points) if you commit yourself to being more thoughtful about your driving. If you want to get involved then you will find more detail on this on their website.Esso is claiming to be supportive of cycling, which is their justification for installing bike pumps at many of their service stations.The world is adapting to cycling and, in London, more and more people are using a bike to get from A to B, rather than a form of exercise.

Ben Owen ● 212d

The fewer roads restricted by, proven by LCC data, totally unwarranted cycling related infrastructure then the better it will be for all of us. Surely you can see this Paul.Less stationery traffic, less consequent pollution, no island bus stops with freer movement of public transport. It is not motorists to blame but the supporters of minority transport methods following an ideology of privilege by restricting free movement for all traffic.

N V Brooks ● 212d

That’s a utopian fantasy Paul. Only the seriously deluded think cycling is the answer. We live in a cold wet country where it’s pretty dark for several months. That’s not encouraging cycling for the non committed, infrastructure or not. You should get out of your LCC bubble occasionally and engage with real people.

Simon Hayes ● 212d

You should care Peter. The more people cycling, and fewer people driving sorts out loads of problems.Not just for buses, and emergency servies and people driving for work, but people driving in general, especially disabled people for instance.Less pollution, congestion, better air, less road deaths and serious injuries.

Paul James ● 212d

What Ben and Paul can’t understand is the nonsense of their eternal argument. Cycling won’t double even with all the infrastructure in place. For most it’s a leisure activity, as evidenced during lockdown when cycling numbers increased. It’s not a commuter method that’s viable for many, for a myriad of very valid reasons. Better to spend the money on improving public transport, particularly making all stations accessible.The other big point the LCC fanatics can’t understand is that most of the traffic on arterial roads is passing through Ealing, either coming into London or heading out. Much of it is commercial traffic (and that includes cars, Paul). Perhaps you’d like to strangle the economy still further with your ideology. Not much is shifted by bike, no matter how hard you try to find examples. Then you have the U era cruising round. They are private cars, just fancy that!A final factor is the ever increasing number of people living in London. They all want stuff delivered, but a lot of them are also drivers. Even not owning a car they will still drive using Zipcars and other hire schemes. Why, even Paul does that when it suits him. More people will inevitably mean more road traffic.Oh, and don’t forget that a large number of people find cycling boring. Not dangerous, just boring.FYI, TfL put the share of journeys that are cycled at 4.5 percent, down from 6.1 percent in 2020. That includes Unber Eats and Deliveroo and all the other obesity supporting food delivery businesses.

Simon Hayes ● 212d

Will, set an example then and give up your car. That's less driving surely.

N V Brooks ● 212d

A classic pointless deflection bing. No need to post a link surely as a member of the LCC you have access to their website where that figure is touted endlessly.

N V Brooks ● 212d

I don’t care or want cycling to double.Just used to jump on a bike & get on with it in my day.Cyclists need to be registered, seeing as they demand all & sundry.You’re not going to get marshmallow roads & cotton wool  kerbs.Roadworks ( like the one at Scotch Common) can be alleviated. Once work is done clear lights & open Road up.All you hypocrites who drive yet resent others who do & maybe less able.Don’t complain about your deliveries & shopping etc taken by motorised vehicles

Peter Yale ● 212d

You're still not getting this.Not no driving Nigel, less driving.

Paul James ● 212d

Still not getting it Nigel. You won't double cycling without making these changes *first*.

Paul James ● 212d

"Therefore it is absoluttly nonsensical to dedicate 33-50% of roadspace."Where is that nugget from? In your reply, could you put a link to it? We do know where there is a growth in cycling infrastructure the growth in cycling is accelerated. It is clear that more cycle lanes are getting more people cycling. However, one of the biggest barriers to cycling is the abuse that one gets when out on a bike, especially women. What do people think when they hear someone say "I am too scared to cycle"? Are you pleased for them?

Ben Owen ● 212d

Do you still drive Paul or are you still being a hypocrite?

N V Brooks ● 212d

Even if cycling rates doubled there is no justification to remove a third of the road space to accommodate ten percent of the traffic. Even the most myopic transport player could see that. Sorry Paul you are simply wrong

N V Brooks ● 212d

Too many cars, too much driving Peter, There will always be roadworks, and ironically, many of them caused by... too many cars and too much driving.This discussion is a classic case showing that some people simply cannot bring themsevles to say this, blame everything else, execept, too many cars and too much driving,

Paul James ● 212d

You're still not getting this Nigel.Cycling levels are too low, but you're not going to see them rise until there are more safe cycling routes, joined up and connected end to end.What you're doing is the same as moaning about investing in a footbridge between brentford and kew and saying it's pointless spending the money as hardly anybody swims across the river there.

Paul James ● 212d

The LCC provided that 'nugget'. It is their 'best case' estimate of the percentage of journeys made by bike. Therefore to remove one lane in three or, in some cases, two lanes in four to accommodate 7% of traffic is basically stupid. The will of course be local variations and central London data brings the average in suburban areas down. This further undermines the need to provide dedicated infrastructure for what, 2-3,%0 of journeys? So I thank you for confirming that Ben.

N V Brooks ● 212d

> "Therefore it is absoluttly nonsensical to dedicate 33-50% of roadspace to accommodate 7% of traffic."I never knew. Where did you pick up that nugget from? However, if you said that 70% of traffic crossing Blackfriars Bridge in peak hours are those on bicycles then I would agree with you. 

Ben Owen ● 212d

Cycling still represents, at 'best' 7% of journeys (the 'best case' figrure provided by the LCC ).Therefore it is absoluttly nonsensical to dedicate 33-50% of roadspace to accommodate 7% of traffic.

N V Brooks ● 212d

Some of the causes behind the increase in congestion post covid:Public transport usage is downPrivate vehicle usage is upIncrease numbers of minicabs and delivery vehicles on the roadCollisions have increased (by about 25%)Cycling has increased, supported by a greater number of cycle lanes, and has been responsible for mopping up some of the lost trips previously made by public transport. Further, The Evening Standard reported on the 28th June that TfL "are in the process of delivering a world-leading upgrade to London's traffic signal system."

Ben Owen ● 212d

Some good news.The lights at Scotch Common, where the work was  completed .4 way, causing congestion & pollution UNNECESSARILY dive 3pm.A couple of big sods were doing Thames Sewage work & moving the cones.Khan:James: Ealing council should be pleased.Typical example of why traffics congested, for no reason whatsoever

Peter Yale ● 212d

Indeed you are correct in every point.Only sad news is my old boy Axl, passed away a few weeks ago (aged 12:5).I have a new boy now - Forrest aged 6 months

Peter Yale ● 213d

Thanks Peter for informing us about the Scotch Common hold-up. It's awful and as you say, nothing seems to be progressing. This isn't the first time Thames Water has dug up that stretch of the road, it's only a year or so since they dug up the roundabout, what will happen next?Anyway, onto things more pleasant, it's only a week or so until the Ealing Beer festival, I assume you and the dog will be going (hope I haven't got you mixed up with another Peter)

Peter Tolhust ● 213d

Exactly, PC James is blinkered & in denial about anything motorised.He gives it a while & then posts some ridiculous comments to keep  lcc anti car agenda in the spotlight.We go round in circles, it’s a basic science.Close 1 entry or exit point, others will be used,Roadworks are a disgrace, Thames sewage for example.There’s a 4,way set of “ temporary “ lights at Scotch Common. A hole approx half metre square. It’s Saturday, I doubt any work will happen Sunday, maybe Monday earliest.All that pollution & congestion for nothing, bothey can. More tax & excuses to blame motorists.

Peter Yale ● 213d

The A40 is a morass of disjointed roadworks and these are likely to delay traffic until the works to accommodate the while elephant that is HS are completed in 2027!IF there are too many vehicles, rather than too little road space then only the most obtuse and myopic highways planner would even consider reducing road capacity by 33% (or in some places 50%) to accommodate c.7%  (at a maximum) of vehicle traffic respresented by cyclists. Even if cycling doubled in popularity overnight the amount of roadspace dedicated to this MINORITY transport method is totally disproportionate.

N V Brooks ● 214d

Trite and unhelpful sums you up Paul.As you probably aren’t familiar with those roads mentioned in the report you probably don’t realize they’ve had lots of roadworks in recent years, plus major construction going on alongside the A40.What causes traffic jams? Putting obstacles in the way. Particularly temporary traffic lights. Most traffic queues aren’t actually that long, but the wait can seem a long time, which suggests the problem isn’t ’too many cars’ but rather too many things stopping the free flow of traffic. The rephasing of traffic lights has had a significant effect.But then creating congestion suits the purpose of the anti car lobbyists. They like nothing better than a bit of exaggeration, which helps mask the tiny number of people who actually cycle regularly.

Simon Hayes ● 214d

All based around a report by a company who#s interest is "Making driving easier" and suggests increasing congestion is a good thing in cities as it indicates increased economic activity...https://inrix.com/products/

Paul James ● 214d

>While the original post was trite and unhelpful,I think you missed the point of my post."If you are travelling at around 3pm the average delay for 2023 was 16 minutes which would represent 63 hours lost in the year for anyone who needed to use this route daily."Drivers losing time stuck in traffic.What's causing the traffic there? Ducks in the road? Too many cyclists and cycle lanes (on the A40), aliens?Or the thing hardly anybody will suggest or say, not even the author of this article.Is it too many cars and too much driving?Until people can start admitting this and seeing it as a problem we ain't going to get anything done about it.

Paul James ● 214d

Could you try any harder to miss the point?It’s not me that’s saying it, it’s TfL and the LCC. Do you think they stop every driver and ask where they are going, how far they have travelled and why they are traveling? Of course not. Yet you seem to swallow their rhetoric without question.Do please try and keep up!

Simon Hayes ● 214d

Since you don't actually know what the drivers are doing or where they are going - you just can't say that!

Philippa Bond ● 214d

No Philippa, I can’t possibly know that, but TfL apparently do. It’s in their statistics, much trumpeted when released. Take it up with them.Of course, nobody knows if all those cars are doing local journeys either. It’s all BS, pushed by a clamouring minority.

Simon Hayes ● 215d

Until everyone is stopped and asked where they are going and why you can't possibly know that.

Philippa Bond ● 215d

It’s not seven percent of transport movement, it’s only 4.5 percent. The number of cyclists has decreased since 2020, despite what LCC nut jobs claim. If you took out Deliveroo and Uber Eats it would be significantly less. Most cycling activity is done for leisure.

Simon Hayes ● 215d

How did we move from inept road planning to the dreadful waste of PPE?In the case of the former removing one third, on in some some cases one half, of road capacity to accommodate 7% of the transport movements is, by any stretch of the imagination, simply bloody stupid.

N V Brooks ● 215d

The performance of the present government and public expenditure can be illustrated by the aerial photographs of the acres of rotting PPE in the New Forest awaiting destruction having cost the public purse around £1.4 BILLION POUNDS.We had nurses and carers wearing binbags and everyone who could sew sewing scrubs and schools' art departments and architects' offices making masks with their 3D printers.

Philippa Bond ● 215d

There seems to be no monitoring of these schemes. The cycle lane in Acton High Street is empty 99% of the time while the many buses that run along there are held up by these and by white vans badly parked.

Susan Kelly ● 215d

"The cost of running a nationised industry is paid for by its customers in the same way as in a privatised one.  The difference is that any profits resulting go to the public purse rather than private dividends." (27/06/24 16:50:00 Philippa Bond)How well/wisely will that public purse be used? Here in Labour run Ealing Council, they cannot, it seems even put up the correct public notice board for the correct parliamentary constituency, for the fortcoming general election.Today, 27/06/2024, on the pedestrianised part of Melbourne Avenue W13, Labour run Ealing Council put up a notice board for the Ealing North constituency. Melbourne Avenue/Sainsbury's are within the Walpole Ward which is in the Ealing Southall constituency. The usual ineptness from Labour run Ealing Council, all in the name of providing public services in an "open honest and transparent way".

Anthony Hawran ● 216d

The cost of running a nationised industry is paid for by its customers in the same way as in a privatised one.  The difference is that any profits resulting go to the public purse rather than private dividends.

Philippa Bond ● 216d

Too many cycle lanes squeezing traffic of all types into bottlenecks all over the city.Meanwhile,as it's a bit on the warm side,there are very few cyclists around..

Keith Iddon ● 216d

I was all for renationalisation. But someone pointed out to me that whilst GWR( to take just one) pays the staff and drivers wages at the moment, that bill would be transferred to the taxpayers.

Bettina Margaret Thwaite ● 216d

The Elizabeth Line is often overcrowded by the time it reaches Ealing at peak times. There wasn’t a lot of capacity planning put into it. And it seems not much thought about accessibility from platform to train given recent injuries there. Increasing the population outside London who will use it simply makes it more problematic for those wishing to get on further in. The real question is why does everyone want to live in and around London?The issue with the railways isn’t Network Rail, it’s the franchise system of operators and a complicated and expensive ticketing operation. It’s a matter of record that certain rail operators perform poorly and it’s an ongoing problem. Of course renationalising it might seem a good idea, but British Rail was beset with problems for years. If rail travel does return to public ownership it will need a lot of proper investment.

Simon Hayes ● 217d

Network Rail is state owned. While public transport isn't 100% reliable it does provide an alternative to motor transport and the Elizabeth line has provided incredible transport links but, in many cases, there has been little development of housing in towns with stops. These could easily be a base for people commuting into work to London. You are right that building housing here will take time but we are also likely to see more usage of the two main arteries into west London in the interim so action needs to be taken soon. You may consider Paul a fool and, while his post in this thread might be considered foolish, he often makes thoughtful and considered comments. Even when I consider someone to be a fool, I think it is best to highlight the idiocy of their arguments or lack of grasp of the facts, rather than being explicit about it.

Gordon Southwell ● 217d

That will take time to happen and meanwhile plenty of oversized developments will be built in Ealing.I’m not sure that the public transport investment is all that it should have been. Perhaps the next government will actually take control of rail services to make them more reliable. No point in building on green belt land if the public transport doesn’t take you where you need to go. Even in Ealing it’s a lottery as to whether taking the Tube or bus will get you to a destination on time.And Paul is a fool. He says the same thing over and over again, seemingly oblivious to the stupidity of what he says.

Simon Hayes ● 217d

While the original post was trite and unhelpful, there is no need for the name-calling. We have spent billions on public transport infrastructure running parallel to these roads yet, unlike what happens in every other country in the world, haven't put much new housing near these links. The current government has wanted to protect the Home Counties at all cost but even that looks unlikely to prevent a wipe out in these areas. Labour will want to build on Green Belt, which, whatever your view of this environmentally, will mean that boroughs like Ealing won't have to do all the heavy lifting on housing starts going forward. Perhaps that finally will end the tall tower mania.

Gordon Southwell ● 217d

‘Too many cars’ isn’t actually the reason. Only a very simple minded individual would maintain that stance.The roads mentioned in the report are major trunk roads connecting London with the suburbs and beyond. They are the main arteries by which goods and services come by road. They are bound to be busy.What the report doesn’t factor in are the ever expanding road works that have affected all main routes in and around west London. If the traffic flows freely you don’t notice it. If it’s stuck at a temporary light then you do, and there have been a lot of temporary lights in operation in recent years.Factor in Heathrow, which has just seen its busiest 12 month period and you see where more traffic is generated. Ironically the A40 and the A4 aren’t the quiet residential roads we are so often and so boringly told by Paul and others are too busy, they are designed to carry this traffic. Most of it isn’t short local trips either.London is getting too congested with people. Even without private cars the ever increasing demands of an expanded population will see plenty of traffic on the roads, servicing those residents.

Simon Hayes ● 217d

Mr James IS a helmet ............. 😆

Rosco White ● 217d

Another silly post Paul.A lot of the traffic on those roads is commercial vehicles during the day. You probably don’t notice when you have your head stuck so firmly up your behind. No wonder you won’t wear a helmet.

Simon Hayes ● 217d