IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Will this sort out our traffic?
dannyboy
post Jan 9 2011, 02:31 PM
Post #41


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Jan 9 2011, 01:53 PM) *
Not a politician then Danny? Man of few words - but at least straight to the point - no ambiguity with that then! tongue.gif

Not a politician, or a wanna be either. If I was I'd be unable to give a direct answer to a question.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
betsy
post Jan 9 2011, 06:01 PM
Post #42


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 32
Joined: 18-December 09
Member No.: 568



QUOTE (Darren @ Jan 7 2011, 07:41 PM) *
Ban buses for the town centre.

Make those lazy pensioners walk further to get their tins of cat food. The exercise will do them good!! wink.gif

Just a point Darren! I am a pensioner and proud of it. I am not and never have been lazy. Paid all my taxes, worked and brought up two kids so don't lump us all together. I may be a bit slower now due to illhealth etc. but I need the buses and incidentally- I don't have a cat!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darren
post Jan 10 2011, 07:31 AM
Post #43


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 15-May 09
Member No.: 61



QUOTE (betsy @ Jan 9 2011, 06:01 PM) *
Just a point Darren! I am a pensioner and proud of it. I am not and never have been lazy. Paid all my taxes, worked and brought up two kids so don't lump us all together. I may be a bit slower now due to illhealth etc. but I need the buses and incidentally- I don't have a cat!!


Just a point. The wink.gif icon indicate it was not a serious comment. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darren
post Jan 10 2011, 07:44 AM
Post #44


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,251
Joined: 15-May 09
Member No.: 61



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Jan 9 2011, 02:29 PM) *
The building of the Newbury By Pass simply shaved 30 mins off a truckers journey to the docks.


On a good day. Sunday evenings that would be 2 hours or more. It was often quicker for traffic to go M40, A404(M), M4, M25, M3, M275 than to sit in the queues.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Jan 10 2011, 10:51 AM
Post #45


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Darren @ Jan 10 2011, 07:44 AM) *
On a good day. Sunday evenings that would be 2 hours or more. It was often quicker for traffic to go M40, A404(M), M4, M25, M3, M275 than to sit in the queues.

which is why Sunday evening is such a popular trucking day!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jan 10 2011, 02:54 PM
Post #46


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



To a transport logistics manager half an hour is big money and so the pent up demand. The 'by pass' itself didn't generate traffic - lets send a few lorries out simply because the A34 is now running.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jan 10 2011, 03:47 PM
Post #47


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,018
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (On the edge @ Jan 10 2011, 04:54 PM) *
The 'by pass' itself didn't generate traffic

Yes it did - just like every road building scheme.
Otherwise why are we now bleating on about Newbury's traffic? (Which by the way seems to me to be no worse, and in some cases better, than most other medium to large towns and cities.)
The by-pass created a gap and it was filled.

Anyway - we are 15 years too late to be having this debate except the lesson to be learnt that you cannot build your way out of this problem unless we tarmac over most of the country.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 10 2011, 04:13 PM
Post #48


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 10 2011, 03:47 PM) *
Yes it did - just like every road building scheme.
Otherwise why are we now bleating on about Newbury's traffic? (Which by the way seems to me to be no worse, and in some cases better, than most other medium to large towns and cities.)
The by-pass created a gap and it was filled.

Anyway - we are 15 years too late to be having this debate except the lesson to be learnt that you cannot build your way out of this problem unless we tarmac over most of the country.

I can assure you that the traffic queues these days are nothing like as bad as they used to be. As proof, just look at the size of the jams through town if the by-pass is closed for any length of time.

Through-traffic volume was growing, and the by-pass was built to cope with it. A need for a by-pass is and was a no-brainer.

The complaints about jams in Newbury have been the result of the works that have been going on lately.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Jan 10 2011, 06:34 PM
Post #49


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 10 2011, 03:47 PM) *
Yes it did - just like every road building scheme.
Otherwise why are we now bleating on about Newbury's traffic? (Which by the way seems to me to be no worse, and in some cases better, than most other medium to large towns and cities.)
The by-pass created a gap and it was filled.

Anyway - we are 15 years too late to be having this debate except the lesson to be learnt that you cannot build your way out of this problem unless we tarmac over most of the country.

People bleat about the Newbury traffice because some people need to bleat. In reality the traffic in town is nothing like as bad as it was pre-bypass.

However, traffic levels are rising - because we have more houses, more businesses and more cars than we used to have. The bypass may be partly to blame because its building meant that the local roads were then able to cope with the development of more houses, offices and industrial units (though they may well have been built anyway).

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jan 10 2011, 08:38 PM
Post #50


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,018
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 10 2011, 05:13 PM) *
I can assure you that the traffic queues these days are nothing like as bad as they used to be.


QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 10 2011, 05:13 PM) *
The complaints about jams in Newbury have been the result of the works that have been going on lately.

Then why this thread?
If traffic queues are not as bad as they were pre by-pass and the works that are causing any jams are only temporary, what is the problem?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 10 2011, 08:47 PM
Post #51


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 10 2011, 08:38 PM) *
Then why this thread? If traffic queues are not as bad as they were pre by-pass and the works that are causing any jams are only temporary, what is the problem?

Short memories.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Jan 10 2011, 09:17 PM
Post #52


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 10 2011, 08:38 PM) *
Then why this thread?
If traffic queues are not as bad as they were pre by-pass and the works that are causing any jams are only temporary, what is the problem?
People love to moan, it's a very British thing to do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spartacus
post Jan 10 2011, 10:49 PM
Post #53


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,809
Joined: 24-July 09
Member No.: 221



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 10 2011, 08:38 PM) *
Then why this thread?

The thread started as a comment on the traffic plans for the town centre area..... 'Thread drift' has taken us into commenting on the bypass, feral kids, the trans-continental road network and danny's gonads.....

The truly astounding thing about a thread discussing the traffic plan for the town centre though, is that in three pages of waffle nobody has mentioned the other 'B' word - Bollards...

The proposal to completely remove buses and taxis from the pedestrian zone should be strongly opposed by all posters on here.... With the bollards no longer pinging up and down like Jack-in-the-Boxes whenever taxis go through there will be no more instances of 'confused' or mentally incapable drivers banging into them at regular intervals... In one swift move it will scrub out 70% of the Newbury forum traffic!




One point I think needs clarification though is why the need to open up the 'Pedestrian Zone' to traffic from 5pm? Yeah, I know it'll relieve traffic flow on the A339 etc, but if maintaining a safe area for pedestrians is so important during the day and traffic is banned when when pedestrian movement is relatively low, why allow vehicles into the area when the numbers of pedestrians is at it's peak?

If traffic can operate safely in the busy, bustling hours of 8am-9.30pm and also now be deemed to be safe enough to use the area from 5pm when vehicle numbers will be high and office workers will be spilling out onto the streets then why have a Pedestrian Zone at all?

I'd argue that it's a luxury that Newbury cannot afford. With the removal of traffic from Parkway Bridge apart from buses and taxis then daytime traffic is confined to the SINGLE CROSSING over the Canal/River. A Pedestrian Zone may be aesthetically pleasing n all that, but it restricts Newbury traffic too much.... Other towns have them but other towns aren't split in half by rivers like Newbury


Still.... somebody must have thought transforming the Market Place into the Dead Zone throughout the week was a good idea at the time... Perhaps I'm missing the point.....?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 10 2011, 11:20 PM
Post #54


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



Newbury high-street is usually dead at 5:00 pm.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Jan 11 2011, 12:35 AM
Post #55


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



West Berkshire Council has the Newbury Vision as a standing policy for developing the town area through to 2025. There are parameters that limit the scope of the works, including the development of a road infrastructure that accommodates The Vision without any major road building. In particular, without an additional river crossing. My feeling is the conflicting demands are very difficult to accommodate. I don't like the proposals, but unless the whole concept is amended then for the next 14 years these are the sort of tinkerings that will be presented.

Interesting article in the local paper for Slough recently - they have installed rising bollards in their High Street and the local Member was quite clear there would be no sympathy for tailgaters stuffing their cars into the posts......
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 11 2011, 12:39 AM
Post #56


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



Yes. While we don't have a 'west circular', we will be forever tinkering.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jan 11 2011, 05:08 PM
Post #57


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,018
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (spartacus @ Jan 11 2011, 12:49 AM) *
The thread started as a comment on the traffic plans for the town centre area........


The sub heading was "Will this sort out our traffic?"
I presume this meant Newbury.
Subsequent posts have stated that there is nothing to sort out with the by-pass and the end of road works.

QUOTE (spartacus @ Jan 11 2011, 12:49 AM) *
Other towns have them but other towns aren't split in half by rivers like Newbury

Most towns are built on rivers and they have to be crossed.
It's the way they evolved by the need for water.
Admittedly, many have more crossings.
So we have built one crossing to the West and now we need another?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jan 11 2011, 05:09 PM
Post #58


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,018
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 11 2011, 02:39 AM) *
Yes. While we don't have a 'west circular', we will be forever tinkering.

And your proposed destructive route for this road?
(Sorry, made an assumption there.
Perhaps you can do it without destroying houses or countryside?)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 11 2011, 05:12 PM
Post #59


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 11 2011, 05:09 PM) *
And your proposed destructive route for this road?
(Sorry, made an assumption there.
Perhaps you can do it without destroying houses or countryside?)

When did I propose a route?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 11 2011, 05:19 PM
Post #60


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 11 2011, 05:08 PM) *
So we have built one crossing to the West and now we need another?

We don't need one, but it would help to make Newbury Town more pedestrian friendly without impacting on traffic flow across the town.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th October 2019 - 04:54 AM