Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [carfree_cities] Car only streets

Expand Messages
  • Ronald Dawson
    ... No offence, but it seems really odd to ban buses from the city centre. ... That s sad and your police seem to be very inept. ... That s another problem of
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      philip@... wrote:
      > In line with World Car-free day, we had a debate on existing car
      >free city centres, recently. But what about Bus-free centres. More
      >specifically, are there any other examples of strategic link roads in city
      >centres (perfectly wide enough for buses), where buses have been banned,
      >but private vehicles, vans and lorries are still allowed? This happens on
      >a section of High Street, Manchester, thus giving commuters living to the
      >east of the city three options if they work on the north or western parts
      >of the city centre, or need to continue their journey westwards;

      No offence, but it seems really odd to ban buses from the city centre.

      >1a. Continue to get the bus to the eastern peripheral terminus (fare £7 a
      >week any distance for the vast majority of users), and then walk up to a
      >mile crossing the city streets where motorists ignore illegal turns and
      >pedestrian-phased lights, and the chances of being hit by a pavement
      >cyclist is high.

      That's sad and your police seem to be very inept.

      >1b. Continue to get the bus to the same point, walk about 100 yards, wait
      >for an unknown length of time for a tram that isn't full, pay an
      >additional £7.40 a week, then a further walk to your connecting bus/office
      >desk.

      That's another problem of not having an integrated transit system.

      >2. Drive.
      >If you've got a car - the preferred option is obvious!

      Things seem to be very corrupt in Manchester. Dawson
    • J.H. Crawford
      ... This is Thatcherite free-marketeering at its worst. See the Paul Mess book, A Very Public Solution, for an excellent consideration of the doomed-to-fail
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        >>1a. Continue to get the bus to the eastern peripheral terminus (fare £7 a
        >>week any distance for the vast majority of users), and then walk up to a
        >>mile crossing the city streets where motorists ignore illegal turns and
        >>pedestrian-phased lights, and the chances of being hit by a pavement
        >>cyclist is high.

        >>1b. Continue to get the bus to the same point, walk about 100 yards, wait
        >>for an unknown length of time for a tram that isn't full, pay an
        >>additional £7.40 a week, then a further walk to your connecting bus/office
        >>desk.

        >>2. Drive.
        >>If you've got a car - the preferred option is obvious!

        This is Thatcherite free-marketeering at its worst. See the Paul Mess
        book, A Very Public Solution, for an excellent consideration of the
        doomed-to-fail aspect of privately managed public transport.

        While buses can be a real blight on heavy routes, it seems unforgivable
        to me to ban buses and allow cars in the center. In Utrecht and
        other Dutch cities, precisely the opposite is true: cars can't drive
        across the center, but public transport can.


        -- ### --

        J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
        postmaster@... Carfree.com
      • J.H. Crawford
        Hi All, Eric Britton kindly pointed out that my response to this message may not have conveyed what I wished. It s clear that in this case, the only
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi All,

          Eric Britton kindly pointed out that my response to this message
          may not have conveyed what I wished.

          It's clear that in this case, the only "reasonable" thing to do is drive;
          I'd probably drive myself, faced with these choices.

          What I meant by the Thatcher reference was that the fragmentation
          of service that results from the free-market approach tends to
          lead to the kinds of difficulties described, including the phenomenon
          where you pay more if you have to transfer, thus paying more for
          service that is less convenient. This problem, and many others that
          stem from the free-market approach, are considered in depth by the
          Mees book, which was what I wast rying to get at


          >>1a. Continue to get the bus to the eastern peripheral terminus (fare £7 a
          >>week any distance for the vast majority of users), and then walk up to a
          >>mile crossing the city streets where motorists ignore illegal turns and
          >>pedestrian-phased lights, and the chances of being hit by a pavement
          >>cyclist is high.

          >>1b. Continue to get the bus to the same point, walk about 100 yards, wait
          >>for an unknown length of time for a tram that isn't full, pay an
          >>additional £7.40 a week, then a further walk to your connecting bus/office
          >>desk.

          >>2. Drive.
          >>If you've got a car - the preferred option is obvious!

          This is Thatcherite free-marketeering at its worst. See the Paul Mess
          book, A Very Public Solution, for an excellent consideration of the
          doomed-to-fail aspect of privately managed public transport.

          While buses can be a real blight on heavy routes, it seems unforgivable
          to me to ban buses and allow cars in the center. In Utrecht and
          other Dutch cities, precisely the opposite is true: cars can't drive
          across the center, but public transport can.


          -- ### --

          J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
          postmaster@... Carfree.com
        • Andrew Preble
          ... In the French Quarter in New Orleans, all buses and trucks are banned (public and private) because of the sensitivity of the old houses and old streets
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 2, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            "J.H. Crawford" wrote:

            > While buses can be a real blight on heavy routes, it seems unforgivable
            > to me to ban buses and allow cars in the center. In Utrecht and
            > other Dutch cities, precisely the opposite is true: cars can't drive
            > across the center, but public transport can.

            In the French Quarter in New Orleans, all buses and trucks are banned (public and
            private) because of the sensitivity of the old houses and old streets being
            constantly shaken by the heavy vehicles. Private cars are allowed on half of it
            while the other half is car/bus/truck free.
            --Andrew
          • philip@aal.cix.co.uk
            ... No offence, but it seems really odd to ban buses from the city centre. Not to the car/tram-obsessed Labour politicians running the city, I m afraid. ...
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 4, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              > philip@... wrote:
              > are there any other examples of strategic link roads in
              > city
              > >centres (perfectly wide enough for buses), where buses have been
              > banned,
              > >but private vehicles, vans and lorries are still allowed? This happens
              > on
              > >a section of High Street, Manchester,

              >
              No offence, but it seems really odd to ban buses from the city centre.

              Not to the car/tram-obsessed Labour politicians running the city, I'm
              afraid.
              >
              > >1a. Continue to get the bus to the eastern peripheral terminus (fare
              > �7 a
              > >week any distance for the vast majority of users), and then walk up to
              > a
              > >mile crossing the city streets where motorists ignore illegal turns and
              > >pedestrian-phased lights, and the chances of being hit by a pavement
              > >cyclist is high.
              >
              > That's sad and your police seem to be very inept.

              They simply aren't around. They would see it as minor offences (until
              someone is killed), and to be fair to them, they are stretched. Manchester
              has 30% less Police Officers per head than London, for instance.
              >
              > >1b. Continue to get the bus to the same point, walk about 100 yards,
              > wait
              > >for an unknown length of time for a tram that isn't full, pay an
              > >additional �7.40 a week, then a further walk to your connecting
              > bus/office
              > >desk.
              >
              > That's another problem of not having an integrated transit system.
              >
              > >2. Drive.
              > >If you've got a car - the preferred option is obvious!
              >
              Things seem to be very corrupt in Manchester.

              This problem is partly due to Metrolink's refusal to have integrated
              ticketing with the bus companies - they do allow (heavy) rail travellers
              free onward travel across the city. Having said, that the Trams are not as
              reliable as the local politicians/media bigwigs would have us believe, so
              there would still be the problem of long waits and missed connections.
            • Ronald Dawson
              ... Oddly enough in Luton, Labour is pretty auto friendly as well and the Liberals & Tories are more pro transit.
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 5, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                philip@... wrote:
                >> are there any other examples of strategic link roads in
                >> city
                >> >centres (perfectly wide enough for buses), where buses have been
                >> banned,
                >> >but private vehicles, vans and lorries are still allowed? This happens
                >> on
                >> >a section of High Street, Manchester,

                >>No offence, but it seems really odd to ban buses from the city centre.

                >Not to the car/tram-obsessed Labour politicians running the city, I'm
                >afraid.

                Oddly enough in Luton, Labour is pretty auto friendly as well and the
                Liberals & Tories are more pro transit.
                http://www.netmark.co.uk/cgi-local/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid985453410,3137
                1,

                >> >1a. Continue to get the bus to the eastern peripheral terminus (fare
                >> £7 a
                >> >week any distance for the vast majority of users), and then walk up to
                >> a
                >> >mile crossing the city streets where motorists ignore illegal turns and
                >> >pedestrian-phased lights, and the chances of being hit by a pavement
                >> >cyclist is high.
                >>
                >> That's sad and your police seem to be very inept.

                >They simply aren't around. They would see it as minor offences (until
                >someone is killed), and to be fair to them, they are stretched. Manchester
                >has 30% less Police Officers per head than London, for instance.

                The city would gain revenue if they were issuing tickets.

                >> >1b. Continue to get the bus to the same point, walk about 100 yards,
                >> wait
                >> >for an unknown length of time for a tram that isn't full, pay an
                >> >additional £7.40 a week, then a further walk to your connecting
                >> bus/office
                >> >desk.
                >>
                >> That's another problem of not having an integrated transit system.
                >>
                >> >2. Drive.
                >> >If you've got a car - the preferred option is obvious!
                >
                >>Things seem to be very corrupt in Manchester.

                >This problem is partly due to Metrolink's refusal to have integrated
                >ticketing with the bus companies - they do allow (heavy) rail travellers
                >free onward travel across the city.

                Who is allowing this problem to persist?

                >Having said, that the Trams are not as
                >reliable as the local politicians/media bigwigs would have us believe, so
                >there would still be the problem of long waits and missed connections.

                So the entire system is totally f$&%ed up, in other words. Dawson
              • Ronald Dawson
                ... (public ... being ... of ... Sorry for the late response, but it sounds like a question of axle weight. One way around this could be the use of mini buses,
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 8, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Andrew Preble wrote:
                  >In the French Quarter in New Orleans, all buses and trucks are banned
                  (public
                  >and private) because of the sensitivity of the old houses and old streets
                  being
                  >constantly shaken by the heavy vehicles. Private cars are allowed on half
                  of
                  >it while the other half is car/bus/truck free.

                  Sorry for the late response, but it sounds like a question of axle weight.
                  One way around this could be the use of mini buses, the STCUM
                  http://www.stcum.qc.ca uses such buses for similar reasons in
                  Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue. Dawson

                  http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~wyatt/alltime/pics/cit_roussillon.html
                  http://www.blue-bird.com/smallbuses.html
                  http://www.daimlerchrysler.com/index_e.htm?/news/top/2000/t00815b_e.htm
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.