# Eventual Outcome For Brixton  High St?



## El Jefe (Oct 13, 2008)

Sorry if this is covered on other Brixton threads, but does anyone know what the long term plans are for Brixton High St? I know they’re improving the Southbound side at the moment and things will return to normal, but is anything planned long term for the northbound side? It’s currently taking about 15 minutes to get from the Fridge to the Academy and I don’t see what they’re planning to relieve this in anyway?


----------



## Kanda (Oct 13, 2008)

It's fucking shite right now. How on earth is bringing it down to 2 lanes going to benefit anyone??

If I got off at the Tube, my journey from top of hill to bottom would take 20-25 mins. Getting off at the Fridge reduces that somewhat.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

That side has already been improved. 


Yay!  good isn't it?


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

Now all the buses are getting jammed before the bus stop before the tube as well as at the tube. 

Yay!  

More walking is heathier.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 13, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> Now all the buses are getting jammed before the bus stop before the tube as well as at the tube.
> 
> Yay!
> 
> More walking is heathier.



But what if the Tube isn't your stop and you're going straight through?


----------



## El Jefe (Oct 13, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> More walking is heathier.




Doesn't really help me if i'm  not using the tube though, eh? My bus goes THROUGH brixton, so i get stuck there for 15 minutes every day


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

The only thing I can suggest is that buses that terminate at Brixton tube have bus stops at the station and don't stop at the town hall while buses that carry on through brixton stop at the town hall, but don't have a stop at the station.  

How much that would actually help I don't know.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

Kanda said:


> But what if the Tube isn't your stop and you're going straight through?





El Jefe said:


> Doesn't really help me if i'm  not using the tube though, eh? My bus goes THROUGH brixton, so i get stuck there for 15 minutes every day




Oh, look I pre empted your questions.   

I was being sarcastic.  It made me miss a train to Sheffield the other week and cost me £78!


----------



## rennie (Oct 13, 2008)

It's shit innit? Took us about 18 min from the Fridge to the Academy this morning and that's without the bus actually stopping at Brixton tube.


----------



## El Jefe (Oct 13, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> The only thing I can suggest is that buses that terminate at Brixton tube have bus stops at the station and don't stop at the town hall while buses that carry on through brixton stop at the town hall, but don't have a stop at the station.
> 
> How much that would actually help I don't know.



that still wouldn't resolve the amount of bus through traffic going down that narrow route past the tube, which is the problem


----------



## Pieface (Oct 13, 2008)

The pavements are all smoothy now though. And wider. I LIKE that


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> that still wouldn't resolve the amount of bus through traffic going down that narrow route past the tube, which is the problem



It wasn't my idea!   

I think it's rubbish.  


It would help a little I reckon.  What partly causes the jams is disembarking times.  If half the buses disembarked at the town hall, and other buses passed them by then offloaded at the station then the 'through' buses could pass those buses at the station. 


It's not great, but it might be an improvement.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

It's shit at the moment - I usually go through Brixton on the way to and from work and it's a fucking nightmare lately.

I'm now walking through the park and getting a 68 to work from Herne Hill.

I wish they'd get on with the work at night and just finish it quickly.

Add to this the fact that every weekend for months now the tube is actually shut, I'm beginning to wonder if the local council is trying to stop anyone leaving or entering Brixton.

Imagine if the Prime Ministers private jet crashed in Windrush Square! The goverment would need to send Snake Plissken to save him.

ESCAPE FROM BRIXTON!


----------



## Crispy (Oct 13, 2008)

Bear in mind that north of the bus stops, they're still working out into the pavement, narrowing things down to 1 lane. I think this is what's causing most of the congestion.


----------



## El Jefe (Oct 13, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Bear in mind that north of the bus stops, they're still working out into the pavement, narrowing things down to 1 lane. I think this is what's causing most of the congestion.



But even when the work is done, isn't it still going to be horrifically congested moving through the traffic lights at the junction? is that just how it's going to be from  now on or is there some long term resolution planned?


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

@ Crispy. 

I'm not convinced.  We have to sit in a queue behind the traffic lights up from the town hall stops in the morning.  The bus drivers are even just letting people off there.

Thing is the pavements were very narrow for all those people trying to walk through the people waiting on busesand getting off buses.  So they widen the pavements.  Now everyone is getting off sooner, the bottleneck is at McDonalds where the road isn't widened.  Plus if no one uses those stops any more there is less need for the pavements to be so wide... 

 

Really we need a terminus but that means knocking stuff down and that isn't very feasible.  Any other tube stations that have that much bus traffic have termini.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 13, 2008)

Dunno. You could try and get an answer out of TFL


----------



## El Jefe (Oct 13, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Dunno. You could try and get an answer out of TFL


----------



## se5 (Oct 13, 2008)

Maybe its because Tfl are keeping their options open - long term if the tram comes to Brixton the tram will terminate near to the swimming pool and preumably they would want to create a terminus with easy access to tram, buses, underground and overground all in one place (of course its going to be around 10 years before its finished, if it even goes ahead)


----------



## Crispy (Oct 13, 2008)

Cross River Tram looks to be dead. Boris is talking it down in recent TFL meetings


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

Personally I would like to see the road closed to all traffic other than buses and taxis. There are too many cars stopping, dropping off, picking up etc during the mornings and evenings, especially in the bus lanes.

Ban 'em all!


----------



## Bob (Oct 13, 2008)

I've given up on getting the bus through Brixton in the mornings now. Every time I try to I just get stuck in traffic at the top of Effra road for 15 minutes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 13, 2008)

I thought you had a bike Jeff?


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Personally I would like to see the road closed to all traffic other than buses and taxis. There are too many cars stopping, dropping off, picking up etc during the mornings and evenings, especially in the bus lanes.
> 
> Ban 'em all!




Can't say I've noticed.  I doubt it would help much. The main problem is bus congestion.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 13, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> Can't say I've noticed.  I doubt it would help much. The main problem is bus congestion.



Not really


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> Not really



Not really what?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 13, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> Not really what?


It's the car traffic plus the buses that causes the congestion - if only buses were allowed there wouldn't be a problem


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> It's the car traffic plus the buses that causes the congestion - if only buses were allowed there wouldn't be a problem




Well of course cars contribute.  I haven't noticed a particular problem with them picking up or putting down.  What I have noticed at rush hour are all the bus stops full of buses picking up and putting down, and yet more buses queuing behind them to get a space, often with no buses able to get out or past.  Cars usually can providing they are not trapped behind a waiting bus, but they often are.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 13, 2008)

Too many buses, not enough road to stop them all on.
And there's no other N/S route under/over the railway anywhere nearby. Clapham to the west, Loughborough to the east (and that's not a suitable route for lots of buses)


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> It's the car traffic plus the buses that causes the congestion - if only buses were allowed there wouldn't be a problem



Actually the problem is that traffic, from all directions, gets impatient and blocks the junction for traffic coming from the side, so everyone gets more frustrated and pushes in.  

Funny how nobody ever blames the cyclists, that weave in and out of the traffic to the front of the queue, then congregate *across the entire width of their side of the road*, meaning all traffic that could get away much faster than people on two wheels is stuck behind everything reduced to their speed - with the amount of crossings between the academy and the bottom of the hill, this causes a knock on effect coupled with the frustration above.

I came through and counted 19 different sites between the Academy and the Ritzy where there are holes, blocked off bits of pavement/road, and dumped stuff.  You'd have thought that concentrating on a bit at a time would have been more efficient, rather than screwing up an entire half mile section of road (plus the tailbacks in all directions) for months at a time.

Nothing that I've seen mentioned in these plans is going to make any real improvement to Brixton town centre, or for those travelling through it, beyond any cosmetic changes.  The real problems aren't being addressed.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Actually the problem is that traffic, from all directions, gets impatient and blocks the junction for traffic coming from the side, so everyone gets more frustrated and pushes in.
> 
> Funny how nobody ever blames the cyclists, that weave in and out of the traffic to the front of the queue, then congregate *across the entire width of their side of the road*



I go through there on my bike all the time and you are patently deluded or dishonest


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> I go through there on my bike all the time and you are patently deluded or dishonest



I have cyclists doing it time and time again, not just on Brixton High Street.


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Funny how nobody ever blames the cyclists, that weave in and out of the traffic to the front of the queue, then congregate *across the entire width of their side of the road*, meaning all traffic that could get away much faster than people on two wheels is stuck behind everything reduced to their speed - with the amount of crossings between the academy and the bottom of the hill, this causes a knock on effect coupled with the frustration above.




Probably the reason that nobody (apart from you) blames the cyclists is that it's such a transparently stupid thing to do. Of all the various types of road traffic that pass through Brixton, cyclists and pedestrians will be the most space-efficient by miles.

It's absolutely right that pedestrians (who nearly always vastly outnumber private car-drivers on the main stretch) should be given more space - and the only way that could be done is by cutting out a traffic lane. At the moment the (relatively small) number of private cars that go through use massively disproportionate space per person and utterly clog the road to buses. I'd close Brixton Rd to private cars from 7am -10.30am and 3.30pm -7.30pm. It wouldn't be problem solved, but certainly greatly alleviated, and at very little inconvenience to the overwhelming majority of Brixtonites (or anyone else really).


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I have cyclists doing it time and time again, not just on Brixton High Street.



The only places they do that is in advanced stop lines and that's allowed. They delay traffic for mere seconds.
They don't do it at lights in my experience


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

It's not "transparently stupid", it's just the political leanings round here tend to favour the tree-huggers.

If there was an adequate public transport system, people wouldn't need to use cars so much.

I use the bus, and most days have to stand, when I can eventually get on the bus, because there are young mothers with pushchairs taking up spaces who should be banned from travelling during the rush hour, and kids going to school that should have their own transport.

The other option, of course, would be to make parents send their kids to the nearest school, rather than miles to a 'good one'.  Why not campaign to improve your local school, rather than leaving it to rot?


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Actually the problem is that traffic, from all directions, gets impatient and blocks the junction for traffic coming from the side, so everyone gets more frustrated and pushes in.



Mostly nonsense.  



> Funny how nobody ever blames the cyclists, that weave in and out of the traffic to the front of the queue, then congregate *across the entire width of their side of the road*, meaning all traffic that could get away much faster than people on two wheels is stuck behind everything reduced to their speed - with the amount of crossings between the academy and the bottom of the hill, this causes a knock on effect coupled with the frustration above.



Because it's nonsense.  You do get cyclists slowing up buses going up brixton hill when it isn't worth overtaking them to get to an impending bus stop.  but not at the junctions at Brixton. 



> I came through and counted 19 different sites between the Academy and the Ritzy where there are holes, blocked off bits of pavement/road, and dumped stuff.  You'd have thought that concentrating on a bit at a time would have been more efficient, rather than screwing up an entire half mile section of road (plus the tailbacks in all directions) for months at a time.



True.  Don't know if it's 19 but it is a lot just now. 




> Nothing that I've seen mentioned in these plans is going to make any real improvement to Brixton town centre, or for those travelling through it, beyond any cosmetic changes.  The real problems aren't being addressed.



Quite probably true. 



Left Turn Clyde said:


> I go through there on my bike all the time and you are patently deluded or dishonest



Agreed. 



co-op said:


> It's absolutely right that pedestrians (who nearly always vastly outnumber private car-drivers on the main stretch) should be given more space - and the only way that could be done is by cutting out a traffic lane. At the moment the (relatively small) number of private cars that go through use massively disproportionate space per person and utterly clog the road to buses. I'd close Brixton Rd to private cars from 7am -10.30am and 3.30pm -7.30pm. It wouldn't be problem solved, but certainly greatly alleviated, and at very little inconvenience to the overwhelming majority of Brixtonites (or anyone else really).




But most of the pedestrian overcrowding was down to people getting off buses or waiting for buses.  Now they've narrowed the road there are less of these (at rush hour certainly) because they are getting off at the bus stop before.  Indeed at the traffic lights before the bus stop before if the driver is kind enough to open the doors. 

And I don't think it would 'greatly alleviate' the problem, as it wouldn't alter the fact that it is buses queuing to get to the bus stops that blocks the road to buses, then as a knock on effect of that, cars. 

I guess we'll see once it's finished.


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> But most of the pedestrian overcrowding was down to people getting off buses or waiting for buses.  Now they've narrowed the road there are less of these (at rush hour certainly) because they are getting off at the bus stop before.  Indeed at the traffic lights before the bus stop before if the driver is kind enough to open the doors.
> 
> And I don't think it would 'greatly alleviate' the problem, as it wouldn't alter the fact that it is buses queuing to get to the bus stops that blocks the road to buses, then as a knock on effect of that, cars.
> 
> I guess we'll see once it's finished.




I agree that the bus "queues" made the problem worse, but the old pavements were ridiculous - a few feet wide yet carrying far more people than the yards given away to cars in 3 lanes of road. They had to be widened. 

You may be right about not "greatly alleviating" the situation though - the space is too narrow for all the various demands. But I don't see any way of improving things that doesn't cut out private cars for at least part of the time; they are grossly inefficient users of public space and when there isn't enough of that space to go round it seems logical they should be the ones to go. 

I doubt if any public body has the courage to try it though so we can expect semi-permanent blockage for buses for the forseeable future.


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> It's not "transparently stupid", it's just the political leanings round here tend to favour the tree-huggers.



Incorrect. The suggestion that bicycles are responsible for the blocked up mess that is Brixton Rd from the Town Hall down to the Academy is indeed transparently stupid. 



ajdown said:


> If there was an adequate public transport system, people wouldn't need to use cars so much.




London's public transport system has its flaws but it's perfectly adequate for the sort of rush-hour commuting that really blocks Brixton Rd. The overwhelming majority of people who are blocking the road don't "need" to use cars at all - and they shouldn't be allowed to when it obstructs the massive majority of commuters and local people using alternative means of transport.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

co-op said:


> But I don't see any way of improving things that doesn't cut out private cars for at least part of the time; they are grossly inefficient users of public space and when there isn't enough of that space to go round it seems logical they should be the ones to go.



When investment in public transport brings it up to a standard that allows people not to need their own cars,  that's more likely to solve the issue than further attacking car users.

The congestion charge achieved nothing.  All that money, and all the other taxes _supposedly _going towards improving public transport is going where?  

I pay £1000 a year for a travelcard just to get to work, to be crammed in conditions that would be illegal if it were cattle, but somehow we're supposed to just put up with it when there are no real alternatives.

Sorting out all the traffic light sequencing that Ken fucked up would go a long way to helping traffic run smoother.

Whilst reducing the amount of traffic is a possible, but impractical, solution ... helping it to flow better would make more sense.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

co-op said:


> The overwhelming majority of people who are blocking the road don't "need" to use cars at all - and they shouldn't be allowed to when it obstructs the massive majority of commuters and local people using alternative means of transport.



Yet you seem quite keen on dismissing the needs of those who do have to use a car.  My partner is disabled and walks with a stick, and I've almost had to physically yank people out of the 'less able to stand' seats on more than one occasion so she can sit down.  

Why are you so against the rights of the individual to choose for themselves how they travel?  Do you really know for sure that most of the people that are in cars don't have a better, cheaper or more reliable alternative to get to their place of work?


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Yet you seem quite keen on dismissing the needs of those who do have to use a car.



Incorrect. I said "the overwhelming majority...[of car drivers]...don't need to use cars at all". 

That means, those who don't need to, er, don't need to. 

It says nothing at all about those who might actually need to use a car. 




ajdown said:


> Why are you so against the rights of the individual to choose for themselves how they travel?



"Individual rights" are fine things but they are only timeless, eternal and untouchable when they are non-zero sum, ie when I can "have" that right and exercise it without infringing anybody else's equivilent right.

When resources are limited, "individual rights" become zero-sum; ie the more I have, the less you or somebody else has (eg your "right" to drive to work is removed by everybody else trying to do the same thing and blocking the road). In that situation it's clearly necessary to have collective solutions and the easiest (and I'd argue, the most morally just) way to that is to remove the least efficient resource-users - in this case private cars.

Why are you so unconcerned about the "individual rights" of bus-users?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

co-op said:


> Why are you so unconcerned about the "individual rights" of bus-users?



I'm not.  I've already said pushchairs/prams should be banned during rushhour, and kids should have their own school transport instead of making commuter's journeys unpleasant.

Thankfully Boris has already tackled the alcohol problem with suitable legislation.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

Also, just look at the cars and count the number of people in them. Generally only one!

That's a lot of space being taken up on the road to get one person from A - B.

I agree that there should be a car ban through Brixton during peak times.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I'm not.  I've already said pushchairs/prams should be banned during rushhour, and kids should have their own school transport instead of making commuter's journeys unpleasant.
> 
> Thankfully Boris has already tackled the alcohol problem with suitable legislation.



What alcohol problem?


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Thankfully Boris has already tackled the alcohol problem with suitable legislation.



Thank Christ for that. 

I've certainly noticed a massive, massive difference since that happened.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Thankfully Boris has already tackled the alcohol problem with suitable legislation.



lol


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

It's not my fault that the bus drivers are unwilling to tackle the problem is it?  They should never have got rid of conductors.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

What problem?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

Alcoholics that can't last half an hour on a bus without a drink.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

I travel on the bus at least twice a day, probably more, and I never encountered these 'acoholics'.


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Alcoholics that can't last half an hour on a bus without a drink.




Booor-ing.

What's happened to the quality of trolling these days?


----------



## OpalFruit (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I'm not.  I've already said pushchairs/prams should be banned during rushhour



Why ON EARTH should people with pushchairs be banned at rush hour? How else do they get the child to nursery and themselves to work?

LOL at the choice YOU seem to demand for yourself whilst decreeing what everyone else should do.

Transport has to work for the whole community - not just YOU!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

Anyone who can't do without a drink on public transport for a short time has an alcohol problem.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Anyone who can't do without a drink on public transport for a short time has an alcohol problem.



Ha ha....what utter bollocks!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

OpalFruit said:


> Why ON EARTH should people with pushchairs be banned at rush hour? How else do they get the child to nursery and themselves to work?
> 
> LOL at the choice YOU seem to demand for yourself whilst decreeing what everyone else should do.
> 
> Transport has to work for the whole community - not just YOU!



People here are whining that cars take up a disproportionate amount of space on the road.

Pushchairs take up a disproportionate amount of space on the bus.  You could fit 3 people into the space that one pushchair does, and they never ever fold them up as they're supposed to in busy times.

So... what's the difference?


----------



## OpalFruit (Oct 13, 2008)

The transport chaos is causing terrible problems for shops and businesses in Brixton.

Like it or not, lots of shops rely on people who park for a short while to pick something up, or spend an hour in Tesco car park and into wider Brixton. But everyone- drivers and bus users alike - are now avoiding travelling through Brixton if they can avoid it. The parking controls have all but done for the stretch of shops on Railton Rd, the new owner of the covered markets has driven out many traders with rent rises - and presumably the Grand Re-Development - of which street improvements were to be one small beginning - is now dead on it's feet?


----------



## co-op (Oct 13, 2008)

How dull is ajdown?


----------



## OpalFruit (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> People here are whining that cars take up a disproportionate amount of space on the road.
> 
> Pushchairs take up a disproportionate amount of space on the bus.  You could fit 3 people into the space that one pushchair does, and they never ever fold them up as they're supposed to in busy times.
> 
> So... what's the difference?



Folding pushchiars  is one thing - in your first post you were on about 'young mothers' and banning them.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

What are the other parts of the 'grand re-development'?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

OpalFruit said:


> Folding pushchiars  is one thing - in your first post you were on about 'young mothers' and banning them.



The problem is one and the same.  Young mothers are invariably travelling with pushchairs and don't put them down.  They also push to the front of the queue and expect everyone to move out of their way when they're the ones causing the congestion during the rushhour.

When was the last time you ever saw a folded up pushchair?

I've even seen people getting on with pushchairs full of bags of shopping - and no children in sight - expecting to be treated as if they should get priority because they fraudulently have a pushchair.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

Damn, those young mothers and alcoholics have a lot to answer for!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 13, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Damn, those young mothers and alcoholics have a lot to answer for!



Sadly I've seen both rolled into one.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Sadly I've seen both rolled into one.



....holding up the buses in Brixton, no doubt?


----------



## gaijingirl (Oct 13, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> ....holding up the buses in Brixton, no doubt?



They should get cars instead - that would solve the problem...


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

gaijingirl said:


> They should get cars instead - that would solve the problem...



The alcoholics or the young mothers?

Or the two rolled into one?


----------



## gaijingirl (Oct 13, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> The alcoholics or the young mothers?
> 
> Or the two rolled into one?




What about the _old_ mothers....    ageist... 

and the OLD _alcoholic_ rolled-into-one mothers... 

and those damn OAPs with their wheelie shopping bag things...

FUCKERS!!!


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 13, 2008)

Shit! I forgot the old alcoholics, and the preachers, small children, the able bodied, dogs, Alabama 3, masked marauders, frog men and hairdressers.

EVERYONE IS HOLDING UP THE TRAFFIC IN BRIXTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 13, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Thankfully Boris has already tackled the alcohol problem with suitable legislation.





ajdown said:


> Alcoholics that can't last half an hour on a bus without a drink.



Are you saying Boris has cured alcoholism by banning the drinking of alcohol on public transport?


----------



## editor (Oct 13, 2008)

co-op said:


> Incorrect. The suggestion that bicycles are responsible for the blocked up mess that is Brixton Rd from the Town Hall down to the Academy is indeed transparently stupid. .


Yep. It's an idiotic suggestion.


ajdown said:


> Yet you seem quite keen on dismissing the needs of those who do have to use a car.


So it makes sense to encourage those who don't really need to use a car onto public transport, no? The majority of car journeys are under two miles and  have a single occupant.  _That's_ the cause of congestion.


ajdown said:


> Alcoholics that can't last half an hour on a bus without a drink.


More irrelevant tosh.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 13, 2008)

Pensioners shouldn't be about in rush hour, they've got all fucking day to get around...


----------



## se5 (Oct 13, 2008)

Surely they dont start travelling until 9:30 from when their freedom passes are valid?


----------



## editor (Oct 13, 2008)

There's no such address as 'Brixton High Street' is there? Isn't it all Brixton Road?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 13, 2008)

The high street is the bit with shops on. Don't care what the map says


----------



## editor (Oct 13, 2008)

Crispy said:


> The high street is the bit with shops on. Don't care what the map says


I know a lot of people call it that, but I don't think it actually exists as an address!


----------



## Crispy (Oct 13, 2008)

nah, probably not. but I reckon the postman would deliver something sent to a 'High Street' address. Heck, even Lambeth's website has mentions of the High Street.


----------



## editor (Oct 13, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Heck, even Lambeth's website has mentions of the High Street.


If you've ever had to deal with Lambeth's services it should come as no surprise to find that they refer to non existent streets in their own borough!


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 13, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> Doesn't really help me if i'm  not using the tube though, eh? My bus goes THROUGH brixton, so i get stuck there for 15 minutes every day



Yeah, me too.  It's making me late for work.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 13, 2008)

Crispy said:


> The high street is the bit with shops on. Don't care what the map says




It might be the high street, but it's still Brixton Road 

and considering it's the arse end of Brixton, it should be called Low Street


----------



## se5 (Oct 14, 2008)

It could be philosophical question: Brixton High Street: concept or reality? Discuss


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 14, 2008)

A friend said to me the other day that they should do to Brixton what they've done in Brussels, dig a big underground road from the police station to the town hall for through traffic and have local traffic with a 10 or 20 mph speed limit on the surface. Apparently it works quite well over there (but obviously there's more space)


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 14, 2008)

se5 said:


> It could be philosophical question: Brixton High Street: concept or reality? Discuss



Reality - everyone calls it The High Street, it serves as a High Street, it has High Street shops on it.

What else would we call it - 'the bit of Brixton Road where the high street shops are'?


----------



## Not a Vet (Oct 14, 2008)

I think there are two main changes that should happen (one of which could be temporary during the works). Firstly, all bus stops should be suspended on the stretch of Brixton Road from McDonalds to past the railway bridge, make that a clearway for traffic with bus stops outside the Fridge and near the dole office. I know for disabled people that could cause a problem but you could always limit these restrctions to rush hour to minimise the effect. (not saying disabled people shouldn't use transportation during the rush hour in case that starts a debate) 
Secondly, the roads around Mass/St Matthew's peace gardens need to be addressed. What's happening is that traffic is backing up because the junctions between Effra Road, St Matthews and Brixton Hill are blocked by queuing traffic (I'll just nip through the lights etc) and thus no-one can move (no flow through). If Keep clear marks were made at key points or box markings extended then it would force traffic to remain at the stop signal until the way forward was clear thus making it faster for everyone.


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Reality - everyone calls it The High Street, it serves as a High Street, it has High Street shops on it.
> 
> What else would we call it - 'the bit of Brixton Road where the high street shops are'?


How about 'Brixton town centre'?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

Well, I do know that the road works will include re-jugging of that entire junction, but I have no idea when it'll happen. The work's being phased so that they don't dig up the entire town center all at once.

This is an old plan, so things are probably different now, but it gives the flavour:


----------



## tarannau (Oct 14, 2008)

editor said:


> How about 'Brixton town centre'?



Does it really matter? Don't people just go into Brixton, or meet at KFC Corner or whatever?

Going to the town centre sounds awfully suburban for some reason. And, for some unknown reason, I can't say I really call it a high street either.


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2008)

tarannau said:


> Does it really matter? Don't people just go into Brixton, or meet at KFC Corner or whatever?


Of course it doesn't, but there's nowt wrong with having a chat about it. Sure beats working!


----------



## tarannau (Oct 14, 2008)

It must be said that this is not a matter of massive concern.


Still, just got me thinking. I don't think I ever think of meeting people or going to the 'Town Centre' or 'High Street' of Brixton - it's generally specific locations or a generic 'Brixton'


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 14, 2008)

Town Centre is a bit Basingstoke IMO!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

I tend to think of it as just "going down the hill" really, but it is to all intents and purposes the main central shopping area of Brixton, and the location of most of the major facilities such as transport interchanges.


----------



## trabuquera (Oct 14, 2008)

Can't we force a vote to have it called "the Node" or "Navel of the World" or "The New Front Line" or something equally buzzy, edgy, vibrant and up-to-the-era?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

You could always name it after the latest newly installed feature.

"The toilet that comes up out of the pavement at night".


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

When's that thing going to emerge anyway?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

I think we should wait until they've actually finished the work before deciding that it's all a disaster and doesn't work.

It's certainly true that northbound is not working in the mornings at the moment, but I think it's probably a bit simplistic to say that now they've finished that side of the road, it should all be running fine because the only work that is going on now is on the southbound side. I would guess that congestion caused by the work on the southbound side has a knock-on effect on the northbound traffic - I don't know exactly how, but I know that these things are very complex. Perhaps traffic lights have been temporarily rephased nearby to help the southbound traffic flow more easily, and this screws up the junctions somewhat. And perhaps, there is more to be done on the northbound side that is not obvious yet.

And - I seem to recall a few weeks back, just after they had finished the northbound, and before they totally dug up the other side, things did suddenly seem to get moving much better again, even if only for a couple of days.

Anyway, what I am saying is don't count your chickens before the eggs have hatched, or whatever the negative equivalent of that expression is.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

Crispy said:


> When's that thing going to emerge anyway?



At night.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 14, 2008)

teuchter said:


> I think we should wait until they've actually finished the work before deciding that it's all a disaster and doesn't work.



 

I hardly think this is the time or place for measured responses to change.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

teuchter said:


> At night.


Keep an eye on it for me would you?
http://87.194.32.232:800/cam1.htm


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> I hardly think this is the time or place for measured responses to change.



You just need to direct your unmeasured change-indignancy at more deserving targets.

For example, in response to your expensive train-missing episode:



quimcunx said:


> It made me miss a train to Sheffield the other week and cost me £78!



You could write a letter to your MP about UK train fare pricing arrangements and their inflexibilty (leading to your expensive ticket) as recommended and encouraged on my "Rail Fare Simplification : What a mess" thread. Or if that is too much effort, you could just bump the thread and then maybe someone else will support my campaign.

For example.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Keep an eye on it for me would you?
> http://87.194.32.232:800/cam1.htm



I've already got a note of your webcam URL from when you posted it once before.

I like to keep a watchful eye on the comings and goings on Brixton High Street.


----------



## Pie 1 (Oct 14, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Personally I would like to see the road closed to all traffic other than buses and taxis.



Love to hear your idea for where the through traffic would go - y'know, with this being one of the busiest transit arteries from London to the south of England


----------



## honto (Oct 14, 2008)

trabuquera said:


> Can't we force a vote to have it called "the Node" or "Navel of the World" or "The New Front Line" or something equally buzzy, edgy, vibrant and up-to-the-era?



I personally like to refer to it as Mainland Brixton


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

That's the trouble with your green loonies... they like to come up with these bright ideas that don't solve the problem, just change it for another.

You can't stop people using the roads for personal cars unless a viable, cheap, reliable alternative is provided - and trying to price people out of using cars (like the government are trying) is not a solution.

Yes it's total chaos at the moment, with holes and closures all over the place, and whoever is in charge of the project in desperate need of a damn good kicking for the mess it's in right now, but it's possible that when it's finished, traffic flow will be better.

What needs doing desperately is sorting out the bus stops - at the moment buses going up the hill are split between several stops.  You need to congregate buses round well spaced stops - Southbound a) those that go along Effra Road; b) those that go up Brixton Hill, c) those that go up past Tesco; and Northbound a) those that go towards Stockwell, or terminate; b) those that go towards Kennington, c) those that go towards Camberwell, or terminate.

There needs to be three lanes, one for buses that stop, and two for through traffic/departing buses.

The wide bit in the middle of the road shouldn't be there, as there are two perfectly adequate crossings not far apart.  Maybe we need some form of subway/under-road entrance to the tube for people from the opposite side of the road to be able to access the tube without clogging up the pavement/crossings?

By the way, why should taxis be ok but cars not, when the majority of taxis seem to only have the driver plus one person?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

The "there isn't a viable alternative" argument may have some validity in other parts of the uk but it simply doesn't in london.

As for taxis...although I sometimes also wonder why they should be given all the priorities that they are and think there may be arguments against doing so, ideally they are there to fill in the gaps where public transport can't do the job - thus helping to make public transport more viable as an option.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

teuchter said:


> The "there isn't a viable alternative" argument may have some validity in other parts of the uk but it simply doesn't in london.



I would question that.

From home to work, by car, I can do at 8am in 35 minutes.  

By bus, I change once, and it takes at least an hour.  Most of the time I end up standing for some, if not all, of the journey.

I refuse to use the tube during the rushhour as it is just so hot and overcrowded.  You wouldn't treat animals like it, so why should commuters endure it?

Clearly there can be no real comparison between a comfortable journey in a car, or an uncomfortable journey by public transport that can take twice as long, if not more, time.

The least enjoyable bit of the working day should be the job itself - not getting to and from it.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 14, 2008)

Pie 1 said:


> Love to hear your idea for where the through traffic would go - y'know, with this being one of the busiest transit arteries from London to the south of England



Actually, I'm not bothered where the cars go, I feel they take up too much space during peak times.

I'm no 'green loony', but I've never driven a car, because I don't need to in London. I get the bus daily, 90% of the time I get a seat, and it takes me about 45mins to get from Brixton to High Holborn on an average day, and sometimes it's much quicker than that - especially during school holidays when there are less cars on the road.

I appreciate that there's a lot of business traffic coming through Brixton, but again this could be taking place at night or between 10am and 4pm.

Buses get caught up behind cyclists, and sometimes this is because the cyclist is not very good at cycling, but mostly this is because cars are backed up on the inside lane which stops the buses from overtaking cyclists.

My concern is for the People of London who live and work here, and right now they get a raw deal because of poor town planning, business traffic from outer London and selfish car drivers who sit solo in their metal boxes, without a thought for anything but their own comfort.

Lastly, the 'London transport is rubbish' argument is pure fantasy - I use the transport infrastructure constantly and it rarely lets me down. yes, it can get overcrowded, yes, it does fail from time to time, and yes, there could be more availability in some areas, but I think it mostly does a good job. I pay £50 a month for my bus pass and I think that's a fucking good deal for being able to get a round 4 zones hassle free.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I would question that.
> 
> From home to work, by car, I can do at 8am in 35 minutes.
> 
> ...


What about cycling? Where do you work?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

I work by Tower Bridge.

Cycling is not an option for me in London.  I need not go into details.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

Sorry if you are disabled, but if you ain't you should give it a try


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

Sorry but there's no way I would ride a bike in London.  It's just not safe.  

Quite apart from taxis, lorries and buses cutting everyone up, you also can't lock the doors and at least be slightly safe.  Also, I have nowhere to put it safely when I'm at home.

If I get this new job and move out of London, I may consider getting a bike, but not instead of a car.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

Chickenshit


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

Throw pathetic insults at me all you like, but that's the reality of it.  I don't know where you live, but the obvious direct route from home to work takes me through some very unpleasant areas.

I'm not a 'tough guy', so why should I put myself in a position of potential danger unnecessarily?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

It's really not that dangerous if you're careful.
And if you have a corridor, you have room for a bike


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

I don't... right inside the front door are stairs.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> ..but the obvious direct route from home to work takes me through some very unpleasant areas.
> 
> I'm not a 'tough guy', so why should I put myself in a position of potential danger unnecessarily?




Hold on a minute, you're actually not suggesting you fear being bike-jacked or mugged on the move somehow are you?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I don't... right inside the front door are stairs.



Foot of the bed? That's where I keep my second bike. Hooks?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

tarannau said:


> Hold on a minute, you're actually not suggesting you fear being bike-jacked or mugged on the move somehow are you?



Anything's possible in Brixton.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Anything's possible in Brixton.


Maybe you should move out of Brixton if you're that fearful


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

I'm trying to, once I find a suitable job out of London I'm gone.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Anything's possible in Brixton.



Oh come on, how many bike-jackings have you heard about? You seem to have lost your sense of proportion and connection to reality.

You're far more likely to have a prang in your motor.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

tarannau said:


> You're far more likely to have a prang in your motor.



One in 18 years of driving.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

None in 3 of riding.
None in 14 years of walking.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

Tower bridge? Take the Victoria line to Stockwell, change to Northern. Walk from London Bridge. Shouldn't take you more than 45 minutes, and you won't be taking up anti-social amounts of space on the road. Anyone who is physically capable of using public transport in central london, _should_ do. Driving it is just far too selfish.

PS: I get attacked by gangs of fearless feral knife children every day and I have to beat them off with my bike lock. It's part of what makes cycling so much fun.

COLON ROLLEYES COLON


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I would question that.
> 
> From home to work, by car, I can do at 8am in 35 minutes.
> 
> ...



Have you ever thought about the consequences of everyone doing your journey by car? Then it would no longer be the quicker or more comfortable option, would it? Your argument is such a stupid and selfish one.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Have you ever thought about the consequences of everyone doing your journey by car? Then it would no longer be the quicker or more comfortable option, would it? Your argument is such a stupid and selfish one.


In London, I'd say it's immoral.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 14, 2008)

I'm really glad you all think so little of me by choosing to exercise my right not to ride a two wheeled death trap in London.  There is nothing stupid, selfish or immoral about my choice - I am exercising my rights as a free thinking human being, within the laws of a free country.

I don't own a car, I sometimes borrow one from work if there are heavy or awkward things that need transporting, because I'm quite sure that if I tried to get on a rushhour bus with an 8x4 sheet of plywood people would be more than happy about that.

You can insult me all you want, but that doesn't make you right.

Since when has Brixton been "central London" anyway?  It's miles out.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 14, 2008)

Crispy said:


> In London, I'd say it's immoral.



I'd be inclined to say the same.

Especially if the journey is to somewhere as well connected to tower bridge.

ajdown, am I right in thinking you live somewhere up the top end of Brixton Hill? If you want to avoid the tube perhaps you could look into walking/bus to Tulse Hill, then the train from there to London Bridge (under 20mins).


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

-


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I'm really glad you all think so little of me by choosing to exercise my right not to ride a two wheeled death trap in London.  There is nothing stupid, selfish or immoral about my choice - I am exercising my rights as a free thinking human being, within the laws of a free country.
> 
> I don't own a car, I sometimes borrow one from work if there are heavy or awkward things that need transporting, because I'm quite sure that if I tried to get on a rushhour bus with an 8x4 sheet of plywood people would be more than happy about that.
> 
> ...


Is it fuck - it takes me 15 minutes to get to Westminster on my bike - barely break a sweat


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

close enough.

you said you could drive a car to work? that's not on, IMO.
I'm a car club member which I make use of when I want to move plywood around (etc)

If you don't want to ride a bike to work, then you can take the bus or the tube.
If you don't like public transport, then I can only say that London is not the city for you. It is far too dense for private cars to work as the main means of getting around. Road space is at such a premium, anyone needlessly driving a car on it is depriving everyone else of a precious resource.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 14, 2008)

15 minutes to Covent Garden, from the very top of Brixton Hill.

20 mins home.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 14, 2008)

Kanda said:


> 15 minutes to Covent Garden, from the very top of Brixton Hill.
> 
> 20 mins home.



How?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 14, 2008)

teuchter said:


> I'd be inclined to say the same.
> 
> Especially if the journey is to somewhere as well connected to tower bridge.
> 
> ajdown, am I right in thinking you live somewhere up the top end of Brixton Hill? If you want to avoid the tube perhaps you could look into walking/bus to Tulse Hill, then the train from there to London Bridge (under 20mins).


That might work. The train's pretty regular. Depends how long the walk to Tulse hill is.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 14, 2008)

Get a good run up down the Hill, start peddling again at Waterloo


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> How?



Probably by cycling like a complete fuckwit, jumping red lights, weaving in and out of traffic dangerously, like most cyclists in London, and exactly why I don't want to ride a bike, in case I am thought to sink to that level of carelessness.

In the same way that a few idiots with guns give the law abiding majority a bad name, so do bad cyclists.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Probably by cycling like a complete fuckwit, jumping red lights, weaving in and out of traffic dangerously, like most cyclists in London, and exactly why I don't want to ride a bike, in case I am thought to sink to that level of carelessness.
> 
> In the same way that a few idiots with guns give the law abiding majority a bad name, so do bad cyclists.



Yeah right, clearly you've read all my posts about fuckwit cyclists... 

You come across as a very bitter individual...


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

I don't have time to read every post by everyone responding in a thread for the last 6 months to be able to build up a full piture of who I'm dealing with.

I'm not in any "in club" here, sorry.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

Then what the fuck gives you the right to make massive generalisations about people?

Or are you intentionally coming across as an obnoxious arsehole?


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

Fuck me AJ, you don't half speak a load of tosh.

You don't need to be in any 'club' to see that you and reality are sadly detached. What the hell is so terrifying about using a bicycle? And besides - and I don't want to point out how pedals work - you could choose to ride it how you like, not spout off another stereotyped rant about bad cyclists.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Kanda said:


> Then what the fuck gives you the right to make massive generalisations about people?



... yet "everyone who is able to should ride a bike in London, it's immoral to use a car" is not a massive generalisation?

Funny that isnt it.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

tarannau said:


> Fuck me AJ, you don't half speak a load of tosh.
> 
> You don't need to be in any 'club' to see that you and reality are sadly detached. What the hell is so terrifying about using a bicycle? And besides - and I don't want to point out how pedals work - you could choose to ride it how you like, not spout off another stereotyped rant about bad cyclists.



I've seen cyclists yelling abuse at other cyclists because they chose to stop at a red light - correctly and legally - and made the other person behind them stop.

Why should I cycle safely and legally, and put myself up for risk of constant abuse from other cyclists?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I've seen cyclists yelling abuse at other cyclists because they chose to stop at a red light - correctly and legally - and made the other person behind them stop.
> 
> Why should I cycle safely and legally, and put myself up for risk of constant abuse from other cyclists?



Funny, i've never experienced that as a cyclist


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Why should I cycle safely and legally, and put myself up for risk of constant abuse from other cyclists?


And you always going on about risking abuse by travelling on a bus.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

No, because people have clearly qualified and explained why they think driving a car in a city as congested and polluted as London can be considered 'immoral'

You, on the other hand, seem to be bibbling hysterical rubbish about bikes not having lockable doors and of hooligan cyclists oppressing decent road users.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> Funny, i've never experienced that as a cyclist



Are you one of the minority cyclists that actually not only knows, but follows, the Highway Code then?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Are you one of the minority cyclists that actually not only knows, but follows, the Highway Code then?


Mostly. Like the majority of all road users, I break it every now and then.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

tarannau said:


> No, because people have clearly qualified and explained why they think driving a car in a city as congested and polluted as London can be considered 'immoral'.



In their own mind.  I do not consider their thinking reasonable.  Therefore I exercise my right to think individually and for myself.

We aren't all wannabe communists round here, you know.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

Oh dear


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

Aye, either clueless idiot or shit troll.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

Wannabee communists? I've heard it all now you plum. 

So far we've been treated on your political judgement of posters based on a few cycling based contributions, your belief that you seemingly travel on the same buses that we do, yet they seem strangely bereft of anyone white and speaking English in your world. And now your perception of people on bikes as 'as 'complete fuckwit(s), jumping red lights, weaving in and out of traffic dangerously, like most cyclists in London'

Which goes to show just how distorted and inaccurate your view of everyday life is, how coloured it is by your prejudices. 

I've lived here for 30+ years and I don't recognise your alarmist world of nonsense.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

Anyway, I was looking at the traffic shunting along outside the tube this morning (while being shunted through the tiny bit of pavement that hasn't been fenced off) and it's by far dominated by private cars, I'd imagine they are parents on the school run or people on the way to work like Mr AJ. 

There's no excuse for it really, especially now that kids can take the bus for free.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

ovaltina said:


> There's no excuse for it really, especially now that kids can take the bus for free.



Ever considered that kids taking the bus for free has driven many people off of the bus and back into their own cars, because kids are always so noisy, and often playing crappy music out loud on their mobiles, making it a thoroughly unpleasant experience for everyone else?


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

Oh no, kids making noise. That's an entirely new development isn't it AJ?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> ... yet "everyone who is able to should ride a bike in London, it's immoral to use a car" is not a massive generalisation?
> 
> Funny that isnt it.



No, I made sure to include the specific "who is able" because I understand that not everybody is able to use public transport to make the journey that they need to. I have nothing against those people or those journeys.



ajdown said:


> Why should I cycle safely and legally, and put myself up for risk of constant abuse from other cyclists?



I have been commuting to work on my bike for 4 or 5 years and this has _never_ happenned to me. I ride safely and legally.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Ever considered that kids taking the bus for free has driven many people off of the bus and back into their own cars, because kids are always so noisy, and often playing crappy music out loud on their mobiles, making it a thoroughly unpleasant experience for everyone else?


Kids have got to go somewhere. I agree with you that dedicated school buses would be an excellent solution to this problem.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Ever considered that kids taking the bus for free has driven many people off of the bus and back into their own cars, because kids are always so noisy, and often playing crappy music out loud on their mobiles, making it a thoroughly unpleasant experience for everyone else?




Ever considered that you could take thousands and thousands, maybe millions, of cars off the road and save parents the cost of running motors they don't need by laying on school buses?

Have you ever noticed how much quicker it is to get to work during the school holidays? Whyzatthen? 

As for kids on the bus, they don't bother me. It's the ones who _don't _go to school and spend their time smoking on the top deck and staring at me like I just shot their dog who worry me.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

There is absolutely no excuse for the level of noise and bad behaviour that most kids seem to generate when away from any form of authority.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

*leaves thread for now*


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> There is absolutely no excuse for the level of noise and bad behaviour that most kids seem to generate when away from any form of authority.


Bring back the cane, I say.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Kids have got to go somewhere. I agree with you that dedicated school buses would be an excellent solution to this problem.



Seems to work fine in the US.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Bring back the cane, I say.



Something's needed, that's for sure.  I see girls going to school these days dressed up like they're going out clubbing instead, full of makeup, bling and whatnot.

I remember a girl at school getting sent home for wearing dark blue tights instead of the regulation black ones.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

National service too 

Yep - yellow school buses just like the US. We actually had a school bus for a few years at my secondary school, but it fell out of use because parents would rather drive their kids to school. Not inner London though, so not really applicable.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown should be on the short bus.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Where I grew up in Somerset, we had a dedicated bus service between my school and the village I lived in, as it was 3 miles away it fell into the area where free transport was provided.  I remember the day that a (usually full) 72 seater double decker had broken down earlier that day, so they sent a 14 seater 'shuttlebus' instead ... I think we got about 45 on it before the driver decided that he'd have to come back for the rest.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Something's needed, that's for sure.  I see girls going to school these days dressed up like they're going out clubbing instead, full of makeup, bling and whatnot.
> 
> I remember a girl at school getting sent home for wearing dark blue tights instead of the regulation black ones.



Gawd. Did your mum stop you from watching the ruffians on Grange Hill?

Haven't things been like this in London for generations? Subverting uniform has always been the order of the day.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Actually I used to enjoy watching Grange Hill.

Maybe it has been "the thing" to do in London for generations, but I didn't grow up in London.

Certainly much of what I see passing as 'school uniform', especially amongst teenage girls, is entirely inappropriate.  It's no wonder boys are under-achieving at school when the girls are distracting them like that.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> It's no wonder boys are under-achieving at school when the girls are distracting them like that.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

This is so a wind up

Won't anyone think of the underachieving nascent lesbians, distracted by their classmates' bare legs and short skirts.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I didn't grow up in London.



Oh really??


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

There's one girl that gets on my bus most mornings at my stop who has hair done up like Londo Mollari from Babylon 5, except it's dyed in a dark ginger colour.







For obvious reasons, I can't take a picture of the real thing.

They'd have been sent home from my school for having that.  They were allowed 3 hair styles - shoulder length, long, or ponytail.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

Good grief AJ, did you grow up in the 50s or something? I remember girls with punk hairstyles in the 80s (long but shaved at the sides and sprayed pink or whatever) and they got stick from school, but three hairstyles??


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Nope, born in 1972.  Obviously my school had standards.  Looking at the school website, it still seems to have.

You really think a 'ginger Londo' is an appropriate hairstyle for school?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ovaltina said:


> Anyway, I was looking at the traffic shunting along outside the tube this morning (while being shunted through the tiny bit of pavement that hasn't been fenced off) and it's by far dominated by private cars, I'd imagine they are parents on the school run or people on the way to work like Mr AJ.
> 
> There's no excuse for it really, especially now that kids can take the bus for free.



Here's a photo I took at about 9.45 this morning.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Nope, born in 1972.  Obviously my school had standards.  Looking at the school website, it still seems to have.
> 
> You really think a 'ginger Londo' is an appropriate hairstyle for school?



I was born in 1972 in Somerset. But I have a more open mind than this ...


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Kanda said:


> I was born in 1972 in Somerset. But I have a more open mind than this ...



Whereabouts?


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Here's a photo



Lots of buses, a few vans and whatnot, but still loads and loads of private cars.

Get those off the roads and it would flow a lot more easily. In fact, looking at Crispy's webcam now, it's zipping along quite happily, and there are lots of people in yellow jackets working on the pavement.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

They're putting a new streetlight in with a crane! Live on my computer


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Whereabouts?



Yeovil


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Funny that... they're doing that on mine too


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Kanda said:


> Yeovil



Ah ok.  Chard here.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

The new streetlamps don't seem to have the faux-Victorian decoration the old blue ones had. They're just utilitarian brushed aluminium sticks.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

Cheaper innit.


----------



## editor (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Here's a photo I took at about 9.45 this morning.


I bet most of the cars have a single occupant in them.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

editor said:


> I bet most of the cars have a single occupant in them.


Most cars I pass on my commute do.
If 3 of those people took PT instead, there'd be room for a whole extra bus in that traffic


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> If 3 of those people took PT instead, there'd be room for a whole extra bus in that traffic



... another bus to be stuck behind a dawdling cyclist riding in the middle of the bus lane?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

editor said:


> I bet most of the cars have a single occupant in them.



Yup. And you can see in the photo how 2 cars take up about the same amount of roadspace as one bus.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> ... another bus to be stuck behind a dawdling cyclist riding in the middle of the bus lane?



How many cyclists can you spot in that photo, causing a hold-up?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> ... another bus to be stuck behind a dawdling cyclist riding in the middle of the bus lane?


A bus moving at 12mph is still better than a car moving at 7mph.

PS: I'm thinking of getting one of those dinky SD camcorders and strapping it to the side of my helmet in order to gather documentary evidence...


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Yup. And you can see in the photo how 2 cars take up about the same amount of roadspace as one bus.



.. and how many cyclists would take up the same amount of space as one car?  Two?

How many cyclists would take up the same amount of space as one bus?  Nine?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> ... another bus to be stuck behind a dawdling cyclist riding in the middle of the bus lane?



Which rarely happens


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

In my car or on a bus, cyclists frequently stay ahead of me on the stretch from Oval tube to the top of Brixton Hill... what ARE you going on about??!!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> How many cyclists can you spot in that photo, causing a hold-up?



More to the point is how many cyclists are there, period?

You won't find many because those that are there most likely be the ones on the inside lane, or weaving in and out of the traffic rather than waiting their turn.  Most of the cyclists are probably all at work by now, out of the way, rather than clogging up the roads.

That's why the traffic is in neater lines - it's not having to sweve out of the way round the cyclists obstructing the road.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

He's too busy checking out the disgraceful attire of schoolgirls to really notice what's going on ahead of him on the road.

Welcome to the world of aj's distortovision.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Most of the cyclists are probably all at work by now, out of the way, rather than clogging up the roads.



Yes, they probably are. Think upon that for a while.




The cyclists have got themselves to work quickly and efficiently. The amount of time they have spent using roadspace is relatively small. On the other hand, the cars are still stuck in a jam, waiting for ... each other. Not the cyclists.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> weaving in and out of the traffic rather than waiting their turn.



I know you're trolling but I can't resist 

Why should a cyclist who can easily and legally get past your stationary car "wait his/her turn" instead of simply riding past?

Just because your outdated mode of transport dosen't work in modern London doesn't mean we all have to sit in traffic all day.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Yes, they probably are. Think upon that for a while.
> 
> The cyclists have got themselves to work quickly and efficiently. The amount of time they have spent using roadspace is relatively small. On the other hand, the cars are still stuck in a jam, waiting for ... each other. Not the cyclists.



I expect you'll find most of those people are either driving as part of their work, or are not working at all such as retired people.

You do also seem to forget that because of the restrictions caused by the roadworks, things are rather slow through that stretch of road now for everyone.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

ovaltina said:


> Just because your outdated mode of transport dosen't work in modern London doesn't mean we all have to sit in traffic all day.



It's only outdated because of years of under-investment in the roads by Red Ken and other Labour related disasters.

There's plenty of solutions to help 'through' traffic get through much quicker... but nobody wants to spend the money.


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

long troll is loooooooooooooooooooooong


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I expect you'll find most of those people are either driving as part of their work, or are not working at all such as retired people.



And?



ajdown said:


> You do also seem to forget that because of the restrictions caused by the roadworks, things are rather slow through that stretch of road now for everyone.



Silly me. Despite making quite a long post about the effects of the roadworks barely 12 hours ago, and taking a photo of them this morning, I had totally forgotten about them. I am getting a little forgetful in my old age, I'm afraid.


----------



## tarannau (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> It's only outdated because of years of under-investment in the roads by Red Ken and other Labour related disasters.
> 
> There's plenty of solutions to help 'through' traffic get through much quicker... but nobody wants to spend the money.



So given that Brixton 'High St' is limited either side by having shops either side and narrow pavements, how precisely are you going to get traffic moving significantly more quickly? If not by implementing measures that reduce the number of cars on the road; like congestion charging and encouraging people onto public transport and bikes for example.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> It's only outdated because of years of under-investment in the roads by Red Ken and other Labour related disasters.
> 
> There's plenty of solutions to help 'through' traffic get through much quicker... but nobody wants to spend the money.




Ooh. I think we'd all like to hear about those. Please indulge us.

Do they include this kind of thing?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> And?



I'd have thought it fairly obvious.

Most of those people probably aren't in as much of a hurry, therefore the delays aren't such a big deal during the rest of the day.

My concern is simply with the problems during the two times I am travelling through that area.  What happens for the other 23½ hours of the day is of no interest to me.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

tarannau said:


> So given that Brixton 'High St' is limited either side by having shops either side and narrow pavements, how precisely are you going to get traffic moving significantly more quickly? If not by implementing measures that reduce the number of cars on the road; like congestion charging and encouraging people onto public transport and bikes for example.



Congestion charge has not reduced traffic at all, it's just moved it outside of the zone.

There is nothing to 'encourage' people on to public transport because the system is overcrowded and fairly unreliable.

The problem is urban over-development since the 60's.  You just need to knock some buildings out of the way so a decent alternative road system can be installed instead.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I'd have thought it fairly obvious.
> 
> Most of those people probably aren't in as much of a hurry, therefore the delays aren't such a big deal during the rest of the day.
> 
> My concern is simply with the problems during the two times I am travelling through that area.  What happens for the other 23½ hours of the day is of no interest to me.



So at the times you are travelling through there, the delays are caused by cyclists, not private cars. At the times when there are not many cyclists,and only retired people in the cars, there are still delays. Which proves that retired people in cars, and cyclists, are what cause delays. But you don't mind about the retired people because they don't cause delays when you are getting to work. Because you don't care about stuff that doesn't affect you, much like the kids on the buses who don't care if their playing music on their mobiles affects you because it doesn't bother them. But they are different, just because. Have I got that right?


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> The problem is urban over-development since the 60's.  You just need to knock some buildings out of the way so a decent alternative road system can be installed instead.



AJ's Brixton come the revolution:






In case you don't know, that's the North Circ, one of the main reasons north London is such a shithole. They carved it up to make way for these roads, which are often heavily congested.

I think you (AJ) should just admit you don't like Brixton and you never will. Move to Hendon or something instead. It's great, honest.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> The problem is urban over-development since the 60's.  You just need to knock some buildings out of the way so a decent alternative road system can be installed instead.



Heh.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

ovaltina said:


> I think you (AJ) should just admit you don't like Brixton and you never will. Move to Hendon or something instead. It's great, honest.


Are there many blacks?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

Traffic expands to fill any road. This is almost gospel truth among transport engineers. The only way to genuinely increase throughput is to increase density. This means buses.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Because you don't care about stuff that doesn't affect you, much like the kids on the buses who don't care if their playing music on their mobiles affects you because it doesn't bother them. But they are different, just because. Have I got that right?



Not really.

Signs on buses say that you shouldn't play music out loud, which they clearly disregard.  They don't have the right to do what they do.

However, there is nothing to say that you shouldn't drive a car on the street as long as it's taxed, insured and has an MOT.  I do have the right to do what I do.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

Ajdown, in this thread you have whinged, whined and complained about Young mothers, teenagers, alcoholics, cyclists, TFL and Ken Livingstone. Anyone who has cared to make a point that does not agree with yours is either a 'green loony' or a 'communist', and you have described Brixton as a haven for murderers and muggers, where the only safe place is either in your car, or in your flat (without a hallway for a bike!). Also, you seem to believe that Brixton is some distant outpost detatched from anything like civilization (or Wesminster Bridge!).

Personally, I think the only thing that is detatched is your sense of reality, which comes across as both frightened and paranoid.

I hope for your own state of mind that you get your job 'outside' sooner rather than later so that you can stop thinking like a small minded mysanthrope and start to see the world as full of nice shiny happy people who never do anything wrong....

...or you could just go back to Somerset.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

ovaltina said:


> In case you don't know, that's the North Circ, one of the main reasons north London is such a shithole. They carved it up to make way for these roads, which are often heavily congested.



Doesn't look very congested to me.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> ...or you could just go back to Somerset.



Long term that is my plan.  It's certainly far nicer than living in London.

The only person I know in the village I grew up in that rides a bike regularly is the local councillor, who's into all the green stuff, is a vegetarian, and an all round wierdo.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Long term that is my plan.  It's certainly far nicer than living in London.
> 
> The only person I know in the village I grew up in that rides a bike regularly is the local councillor, who's into all the green stuff, is a vegetarian, and an all round wierdo.



you're a fucking gem you are!


----------



## T & P (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Doesn't look very congested to me.


 It is on most weekdays at peak times. And of course, it's a fucking eyesore and makes the whole area it goes through a desolated wasteland populated only by Kingdom of Leather sofa stores and similar enterprises.

Though perhaps that's actually your idea of a good place to live...


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

T & P said:


> It is on most weekdays at peak times. And of course, it's a fucking eyesore and makes the whole area it goes through a desolated wasteland populated only by Kingdom of Leather sofa stores and similar enterprises.
> 
> Though perhaps that's actually your idea of a good place to live...



I don't like leather sofas, you sweat and stick to them.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Not really.
> 
> Signs on buses say that you shouldn't play music out loud, which they clearly disregard.  They don't have the right to do what they do.
> 
> However, there is nothing to say that you shouldn't drive a car on the street as long as it's taxed, insured and has an MOT.  I do have the right to do what I do.



Is your sense of morality purely defined by what is and isn't legal or defined by some rulebook?


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Doesn't look very congested to me.



From Wikipedia: _"In 2004, Mayor of London Ken Livingstone promised limited improvements to the road, but he has received criticism for not approving earlier plans for widening the *often heavily congested road* at critical sections. The status of these plans under the current Mayor, Boris Johnson, is unknown.

London's successful bid to host the 2012 Summer Olympics has increased speculation that the road will be upgraded to provide for adequate traffic during the Games."_

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A406_road

Looks like now your man is in, he might carve through entire communities in east London the way the enlightened planners in the 60s carved through north London. Great.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=9lKDjZIgceA


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I don't like leather sofas, you sweat and stick to them.



Nothing wrong with being sweaty and sticky!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Nothing wrong with being sweaty and sticky!



... in certain circumstances.  But not sitting on a sofa.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> ... in certain circumstances.  But not sitting on a sofa.



Depends what your doing on the sofa.

Then again, it's probably against your rules to engage in 'sweaty/sticky' outside the bedroom.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

ovaltina said:


> Looks like now your man is in, he might carve through entire communities in east London the way the enlightened planners in the 60s carved through north London. Great.



I didn't vote in the mayoral elections, but given that I didn't want Ken in, and certainly didn't want Paddick in, I think the best option got there in the end.  So Boris isn't exactly 'my man' but at least the most obvious choice.

Sometimes drastic measures of improvement are needed for the greater good of the wider population.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Depends what your doing on the sofa.
> 
> Then again, it's probably against your rules to engage in 'sweaty/sticky' outside the bedroom.



Don't tell me you leave the light on... you pervert!


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

It's like arguing with a child. I give up.

Yes AJ you're right. Let's bulldoze your house first though.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I didn't vote in the mayoral elections, but given that I didn't want Ken in, and certainly didn't want Paddick in, I think the best option got there in the end.  So Boris isn't exactly 'my man' but at least the most obvious choice.
> 
> Sometimes drastic measures of improvement are needed for the greater good of the wider population.



You still haven't answered my question from your 'alcoholics trolling' posts.  What problem has Boris solved by banning the drinking of alcohol on public transport?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

Keep discussions in their own thread please.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 15, 2008)

Drat, I had a bet with Not A Vet last night that AJ was in his fifties.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Keep discussions in their own thread please.



It is from this thread.  Post 68.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Keep discussions in their own thread please.



It's from the first couple of pages of this thread.

It was ajdown who introduced the alcoholism element to the discussion.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> It's from the first couple of pages of this thread.
> 
> It was ajdown who introduced the alcoholism element to the discussion.



Yeah, those crazy alcoholics stumbling about the buses in Brixton and stopping us all getting to work!


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

The difficulty is that people who feel they have a 'right' to drink alcohol on public transport just cannot comprehend that there are many people that do not wish to be exposed to it at all, let alone at inappropriate times of the day.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> The difficulty is that people who feel they have a 'right' to drink alcohol on public transport just cannot comprehend that there are many people that do not wish to be exposed to it at all, let alone at inappropriate times of the day.



Exposed to what at all.  The sight of someone with a drink in their hand? 

How is that different to someone drinking a can of coke?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

We've done this one before I'm afraid quimcunx


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

When was the last time you heard of someone getting abusive or throwing up because they drank one can of coke too many?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> The difficulty is that people who feel they have a 'right' to drink alcohol on public transport just cannot comprehend that there are many people that do not wish to be exposed to it at all, let alone at inappropriate times of the day.



I don't want to be exposed to fumes from car exhausts, at any time of the day. But you are happy for cars not to be banned.

In my case, there are proven health disbenefits. In your case there are none. Other than that what is the difference?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> When was the last time you heard of someone getting abusive or throwing up because they drank one can of coke too many?



It's drunkeness you oppose, not drinking.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> We've done this one before I'm afraid quimcunx



Yes... we have.

*removes self from thread*


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> In my case, there are proven health disbenefits. In your case there are none. Other than that what is the difference?



If you really, truly think that there are no health dangers involved in drinking alcohol, then you really are ignoring reality.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> If you really, truly think that there are no health dangers involved in drinking alcohol, then you really are ignoring reality.



*temporarily reinstalls self on thread*

I was talking about health dangers involved in observing others drink alcohol, silly-billy.

*re-removes self from thread*


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> It's drunkeness you oppose, not drinking.



Wrong.

Drunken behaviour is indeed a problem, but people wouldn't get there if they weren't drinking alcohol in the first place.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Drunken behaviour is indeed a problem, but people wouldn't get there if they weren't drinking alcohol in the first place.



They wouldn't get there if they weren't breathing either.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Drunken behaviour is indeed a problem, but people wouldn't get there if they weren't drinking alcohol in the first place.



EDIT: No actually, pointless argument.


----------



## T & P (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Drunken behaviour is indeed a problem, but people wouldn't get there if they weren't drinking alcohol in the first place.


 People wouldn't kill themselves and others on the road if we banned cars either.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

Are you related to Dravinian? Or Annakey?


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> EDIT: No actually, pointless argument.



...and breathing?


----------



## kyser_soze (Oct 15, 2008)

How fucking long does it take to rip up a pavement, replace a cabling pipe and rebuild the road?

8 weeks and counting if you're a Lambeth contractor working on Pulross road. Makes my bus journey up the high st an extra 5-10 mins...fucking joke...


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2008)

Kanda said:


> Are you related to Dravinian? Or Annakey?


I have met ajdown and he is neither of those people.


----------



## Kanda (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> I have met ajdown and he is neither of those people.



Is he like this in person??!!


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 15, 2008)

Crispy said:


> We've done this one before I'm afraid quimcunx




Then I've missed his answer to my question.  Can you point me to it? 


He seems to think Boris has effectively tackled a problem by not allowing people to drink on public transport, people who can't go half an hour without a drink and therefore have a drink problem.  But those people don't become magically sober for the sake of half an hour on a bus, so AJ's own posts contradict his assertion that Boris has tackled anything.

Sorry if I've repeated what's already been said. 


I had been doing so well at resisting this thread allll morning.  circular trolling thread is circular.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 15, 2008)

kyser_soze said:


> How fucking long does it take to rip up a pavement, replace a cabling pipe and rebuild the road?
> 
> 8 weeks and counting if you're a Lambeth contractor working on Pulross road. Makes my bus journey up the high st an extra 5-10 mins...fucking joke...




It's going on until January, I think I saw on a board.


----------



## kyser_soze (Oct 15, 2008)

Fucking hell, what are they doing there? I mean aside from building a traffic calming hump on the entrance road for a left turn that you have to take at about 1 mph to actually get round and something involving cable tubing...


----------



## nick (Oct 15, 2008)

Nanker Phelge said:


> Yeah, those crazy alcoholics stumbling about the buses in Brixton and stopping us all getting to work!



Please god don't for a moment think I agree with AJDown, but:

On Monday night A man collapsed in the middle of the A23 outside the beehive. I was one of 2 cyclists (+ 2 people in a passing car) that blocked off the middle of the road to stop him being crushed by passing traffic until the ambulance turned up

Turns out he was a polishman who has spent considerable time in the Beehive.

So in one single event the law abiding sole occupants of passing cars were held up by:
Cyclists
Alcohol abuse
foreigners

Thank god there were no schoolgirls in short skirts lighting bonfires at that time of night or AJ would have had the complete set of his pet hates


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

nick said:


> Thank god there were no schoolgirls in short skirts lighting bonfires at that time of night or AJ would have had the complete set of his pet hates



You forgot to add tofu to that list.  Why anyone would eat that shit is beyond me.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> You forgot to add tofu to that list.  Why anyone would eat that shit is beyond me.



Lots of things are beyond you


----------



## ovaltina (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> You forgot to add tofu to that list.  Why anyone would eat that shit is beyond me.



I had some last night and it was very tasty


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> You forgot to add tofu to that list.  Why anyone would eat that shit is beyond me.



tofu holds up buses?


----------



## TruXta (Oct 15, 2008)

Beyond ajdown-gate: What if, in a hypothetical world where actual reasoning took place, something like the _shared space_ traffic model was implemented around Brixton, and indeed London as a whole?

To quote from the website:
"Shared Space - a relatively new name for a concept emerging across Europe. It encapsulates a new philosophy and set of principles for the design, management and maintenance of streets and public spaces, based on the integration of traffic with other forms of human activity. The most recognizable characteristic of shared space is the absence of conventional traffic signals, signs, road markings, humps and barriers - all the clutter essential to the highway. The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context, and behaviour (such as speed) is controlled by everyday norms of behaviour."


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 15, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> It's going on until January, I think I saw on a board.


 


That's the whole schedule of works, NOT just Pulross Road


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

TruXta said:


> Beyond ajdown-gate: What if, in a hypothetical world where actual reasoning took place, something like the _shared space_ traffic model was implemented around Brixton, and indeed London as a whole?
> 
> To quote from the website:
> "Shared Space - a relatively new name for a concept emerging across Europe. It encapsulates a new philosophy and set of principles for the design, management and maintenance of streets and public spaces, based on the integration of traffic with other forms of human activity. The most recognizable characteristic of shared space is the absence of conventional traffic signals, signs, road markings, humps and barriers - all the clutter essential to the highway. The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context, and behaviour (such as speed) is controlled by everyday norms of behaviour."



They've been talking about it in K&C for a while:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/sep/30/transport.london

And in fact the removal of the barrier in the central reservation in Brixton as part of the current work is a nod to this philosophy.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

TruXta said:


> The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context, and behaviour (such as speed) is controlled by everyday norms of behaviour."



God help us all if that ever happens.


----------



## kyser_soze (Oct 15, 2008)

TruXta said:


> Beyond ajdown-gate: What if, in a hypothetical world where actual reasoning took place, something like the _shared space_ traffic model was implemented around Brixton, and indeed London as a whole?
> 
> To quote from the website:
> "Shared Space - a relatively new name for a concept emerging across Europe. It encapsulates a new philosophy and set of principles for the design, management and maintenance of streets and public spaces, based on the integration of traffic with other forms of human activity. The most recognizable characteristic of shared space is the absence of conventional traffic signals, signs, road markings, humps and barriers - all the clutter essential to the highway. The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context, and behaviour (such as speed) is controlled by everyday norms of behaviour."



Didn't the guy who came up with this die recently? Some Dutch dude, walked backwards over zebra crossings in towns where his vision had been implemented.

The only real thing with this is I wouldn't trust London or British drivers to behave in the ways required.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 15, 2008)

teuchter said:


> And in fact the removal of the barrier in the central reservation in Brixton as part of the current work is a nod to this philosophy.



Fat lot of good it's done, hasn't it?  At least before drivers knew there was a fairly good chance of only having idiots running in front of you outside KFC and the tube station trying to cross the road, now you have to look everywhere all the time for people that won't cross in the right places.

What sort of example is it teaching children about crossing the road safely?  That instead of using crossings or clear spaces, anywhere is fair game?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown said:


> now you have to look everywhere all the time for people that won't cross in the right places



Good! You should be doing that anyway.


----------



## TruXta (Oct 15, 2008)

Well, shared-space models are far from perfect - indeed they have been criticized as relying too much on eye-contact, which, ya know, is no good for the blind.

That doesn't IMO mean that the fundamental premise of the model is wrong, only that it needs tweaking to accomodate the disabled.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 15, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> That's the whole schedule of works, NOT just Pulross Road




Oh, I did mean the whole thing, not just Pulross Road.  I wasn't very clear.


----------



## Dan U (Oct 15, 2008)

ajdown for mayor!


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 16, 2008)

I dedicated my morning cycle commute to AJ Down today. In one half metre stretch of Atlantic Road I reckon I swerved 13.2 times. 
Tomorrow I shall attempt to swerve whilst juggling lager and tofu.


----------



## Not a Vet (Oct 16, 2008)

I think there should be a blue plaque attached to the wall upon completion of the works in Brixton High St. It could say something like:

"AJDown moaned here 2008"


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> I dedicated my morning cycle commute to AJ Down today. In one half metre stretch of Atlantic Road I reckon I swerved 13.2 times.
> Tomorrow I shall attempt to swerve whilst juggling lager and tofu.



You forgot to be smoking, and listening to (c)rap music loudly on a tinny mobile phone.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 16, 2008)

I'll add 'em to the list AJ.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Thankyou.  I expect photographic proof.


----------



## Jonti (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Fat lot of good it's done, hasn't it?  At least before drivers knew there was a fairly good chance of only having idiots running in front of you outside KFC and the tube station trying to cross the road, now you have to look everywhere all the time for people that won't cross in the right places.
> 
> What sort of example is it teaching children about crossing the road safely?  That instead of using crossings or clear spaces, anywhere is fair game?


Anywhere is fair game.  There are no "jaywalking" laws in the UK (except for motorways). 

People are road users too; if you can't drive safely on the busy streets of London, it may be sensible for you to leave your car at home until you've upped your game.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Jonti said:


> Anywhere is fair game.  There are no "jaywalking" laws in the UK (except for motorways).



There should be.

If, as a pedestrian, I can walk to the nearest safe point and cross the road on the traffic lights, why is it so difficult for other people to grasp the concept that wandering in and out of traffic that is likely to move at any time is not the safest of things to do?

As a driver, you should be concentrating on the traffic in front of you and to the side of you - not having to look in every direction for some pedestrian wandering through.

The barriers in the middle served a very useful purpose.  The only problem is they didn't have razor wire on top to stop people clambering over it.


----------



## Jonti (Oct 16, 2008)

Yeah, so you say. I disagree.

Now piss off, grow up, and learn to deal with things as they actually are.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Jonti said:


> Yeah, so you say. I disagree.
> 
> Now piss off, grow up, and learn to deal with things as they actually are.



... or campaign to improve standards for the benefit of everyone.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> As a driver, you should be concentrating on the traffic in front of you and to the side of you - not having to look in every direction for some pedestrian wandering through.



You should be doing both.


----------



## happyshopper (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> As a driver, you should be concentrating on the traffic in front of you and to the side of you - not having to look in every direction for some pedestrian wandering through.



No. Absolutely not.

Brixton Road, through the town centre, is and should be shared space. If motorists can't learn to share it with pedestrians it's them who should be excluded, not the pedestrians.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Crispy said:


> You should be doing both.



Pedestrians have pedestrian crossings.  As far as I'm concerned, if you're standing on the road outside of a designated crossing point, you're in the way, and shouldn't be there.

In an argument between vehicles and peoples, people usually come off worse.  It's in their own best interests.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

happyshopper said:


> No. Absolutely not.
> 
> Brixton Road, through the town centre, is and should be shared space. If motorists can't learn to share it with pedestrians it's them who should be excluded, not the pedestrians.



You are 100% wrong.

By your thinking, cars should be allowed to drive on the pavement.

There is a reason that cars and pedestrians have separate places to be.  For everyone's benefit.

I don't know why so many people here are rabidly anti-car.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 16, 2008)

Because they're dangerous, polluting noisy and selfish (in the city at least)

I have much less opposition to cars outside the city.


----------



## Jonti (Oct 16, 2008)

No, ajdown, you y'daft cunt. The pavements are the part of the road that is legally restricted to foot traffic.

I'm anti-stupid, not anti-car.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Cyclists are most certainly dangerous and selfish, but nobody seems bothered about them.

Taxi's are everything you blame on cars, but never seem to get attacked in the same way.

Face it.  Cars are a necessary and integral part of modern life, wherever you are in the UK.  You can't change that fact, and until there is a cheap, reliable, comfortable public transport system in place, people are going to choose what is best for them and them alone.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> You are 100% wrong..



No, you are 101% wrong.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Cyclists are most certainly dangerous and selfish, but nobody seems bothered about them.
> 
> Taxi's are everything you blame on cars, but never seem to get attacked in the same way.
> 
> Face it.  Cars are a necessary and integral part of modern life, wherever you are in the UK.  You can't change that fact, and until there is a cheap, reliable, comfortable public transport system in place, people are going to choose what is best for them and them alone.



Do you want a cheap, reliable and comfortable public transport system, then?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 16, 2008)

stand infront of a 15mph bicycle and then a 30mph car and see which is more dangerous.

(PS: A reliable public transport system is only possible in the city when there's enough road space for it. chicken egg chicken egg chicken egg)


----------



## happyshopper (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> There is a reason that cars and pedestrians have separate places to be.



Not in town centres. One of the main things that has been learnt in recent years about how towns work is that dividing up the space with fences is destructive of everything a town should be. If motorists cannot cope with driving slowly through the centre of Brixton they shouldn't be let near a vehicle.


----------



## Jonti (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Cyclists are most certainly dangerous and selfish, but nobody seems bothered about them.
> 
> Taxi's are everything you blame on cars, but never seem to get attacked in the same way.
> 
> Face it.  Cars are a necessary and integral part of modern life, wherever you are in the UK.  You can't change that fact, and until there is a cheap, reliable, comfortable public transport system in place, people are going to choose what is best for them and them alone.


mmmm. And selfish ignorant crooks will be ridiculed when they act all innocent.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Jonti said:


> No, ajdown, you y'daft cunt. The pavements are the part of the road that is legally restricted to foot traffic.
> 
> I'm anti-stupid, not anti-car.



Highway code.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070108

1. Always show due care and consideration for others.

7. First find a safe place to cross and where there is space to reach the pavement on the other side. *Where there is a crossing nearby, use it*.


----------



## Not a Vet (Oct 16, 2008)

We are not all anti-car but it seems that if no-one agrees with your viewpoint then we are all wrong (nutters etc). I don't see why you have to be so agressive and offensive all the time?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Do you want a cheap, reliable and comfortable public transport system, then?



Yes, but it will never be as convenient as being able to hop into your own car to go straight to where you want to go.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Not a Vet said:


> I don't see why you have to be so agressive and offensive all the time?



I think "defensive" is the word you're looking for.

It's clear I'm in the minority around here - but just because there are so many left wing commie wannabe tree huggers doesn't mean they're right.  It just means they're louder - which is the usual result, all mouth and no trousers.

You always see the SWP and other leftie groups out harrassing shoppers trying to get them to take their free newspaper, but you never seen the Young Conservatives out doing it, do you?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Yes, but it will never be as convenient as being able to hop into your own car to go straight to where you want to go.


Well, quite frankly, tough titties.

It would be more convenient for me to put my legs up on the other seats on the train. It would be more convenient for me if I could knock down the houses over the road and replace them with pasture for my own private heard of prime steak cows. It would be more convenient for me if I had my own private power plant so I could leave my windows open in the winter and still keep the house warm.

Desiring your own convenience at the expense of other people's is commonly called *being selfish*

PS: The SWP give us commie tree huggers a bad rep. Nobody likes them


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Desiring your own convenience at the expense of other people's is commonly called *being selfish*



... yet you don't think of it when pedestrians want to cross diagonally through busy traffic, instead of walking 50m to the nearest crossing?  Or cyclists weaving in and out of traffic?



Crispy said:


> PS: The SWP give us commie tree huggers a bad rep. Nobody likes them



Nobody seems to like the SWP.  I remember having a nice argument with some young lass outside Iceland who insisted on yelling through a megaphone.


----------



## Jonti (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Highway code.
> 
> http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070108
> 
> ...


LOL.

You're the muppet whose been spouting the ignorance pal.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 16, 2008)

Running out into traffic is stupid. Weaving around on a bike like it's a video game is stupid. I have not condoned such behaviour.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Jonti said:


> LOL.
> 
> You're the muppet whose been spouting the ignorance pal.



LISTEN TO THE MAN

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4WDUdebqDEs&feature=related


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> but just because there are so many left wing commie wannabe tree huggers doesn't mean they're right.  It just means they're louder - which is the usual result, all mouth and no trousers.



Do you really work in the voluntary sector? 
And I think you should carry on reading that Highway Code.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Yes, but it will never be as convenient as being able to hop into your own car to go straight to where you want to go.




If you truly believe this perhaps you should start a campaign to get more people driving cars, instead of taking the bus, cycling or walking. 

I, however, suspect if 50%, even 10%, of the people on the buses that came through brixton this morning decided to exercise their right to be selfish and take their cars instead you would soon find hopping in your car to go straight where you want to go a lot less convenient. You would also find yourself sitting stationary while those people who still chose to take the bus  sailed conveniently past in the bus lane.


----------



## Jonti (Oct 16, 2008)

Of course people should keep themselves safe, ajdown.

And from what you've been saying here, we'd be a whole lot safer is we slashed your tyres.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Yes, but it will never be as convenient as being able to hop into your own car to go straight to where you want to go.



So - can we get this clear: 

In theory you want a cheap, convenient and comfortable public transport system, but you do not believe such a thing (by your standards) to be possible in practice, even in London.

Can you confirm that I have understood you correctly?


----------



## T & P (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> You always see the SWP and other leftie groups out harrassing shoppers trying to get them to take their free newspaper, but you never seen the Young Conservatives out doing it, do you?


 Is it because they're busy trying to sell 'Hang Mandela' t-shirts?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 16, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> You would also find yourself sitting stationary while those people who still chose to take the bus sailed conveniently past in the bus lane.


 

Except no buses are sailing anywhere in Brixton High Road at the moment


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

teuchter said:


> So - can we get this clear:
> 
> In theory you want a cheap, convenient and comfortable public transport system, but you do not believe such a thing (by your standards) to be possible in practice, even in London.
> 
> Can you confirm that I have understood you correctly?



When it is run by a private company, as it all is, and shareholder profit is more important than quality of service, I don't think it is possible, no.

When I do my regular weekend train journey, it's 2 hours 4 minutes from King's Cross, with one change.  In almost 2 years, it's let me down just twice.

When my sweetie gets on the bus in Brixton to go home, it takes longer to get from there to King's Cross than it does on the train to get to Peterborough.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Except no buses are sailing anywhere in Brixton High Road at the moment



Webcam says otherwise.  Traffic appeared to be moving fairly easily.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> When it is run by a private company, as it all is, and shareholder profit is more important than quality of service, I don't think it is possible, no.



Your answer is a little vague. Can I infer that you are saying the following?

1. Nationalise it all and then it will be possible to run a service that will be acceptable to you.

2. Otherwise, it is impossible to run a service that will be acceptable for you.

Is this correct?


----------



## T & P (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> When it is run by a private company, as it all is, and shareholder profit is more important than quality of service, I don't think it is possible, no.


  

Be careful there. Someone might overheard you say that and think you're a leftie.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

It's difficult to say whether nationalised, where it's run as a service instead of lining shareholder's pockets as its first priority, a significant improvement would be made.

I don't remember enough about the buses before de-regulation.

There are, however, non-bus options such as reopening the 'lost platforms' at Brixton which would enable services to run into London Bridge, which would give better travelling options for me.

I don't have a problem with public transport, and in general would prefer to use it - but when the journey becomes difficult with many changes, it's no wonder people revert to cars.

This evening, I will be driving to Lincolnshire.  Nobody in their right mind would do that 120 mile journey by pushbike.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

T & P said:


> Be careful there. Someone might overheard you say that and think you're a leftie.



I don't subscribe to any particular political viewpoint.  My interest in politics could be summaried as "don't give a toss".


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Your answer is a little vague. Can I infer that you are saying the following?
> 
> 1. Nationalise it all and then it will be possible to run a service that will be acceptable to you.
> 
> ...



Can you answer the question please?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Already answered to the best of my ability.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Already answered to the best of my ability.



Would I be correct in interpreting your answer as saying it would probably not be possible to run a service that you would find acceptable?


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Not necessarily, no.


----------



## Not a Vet (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> This evening, I will be driving to Lincolnshire.  Nobody in their right mind would do that 120 mile journey by pushbike.



Right, now's our chance, I'll organise the stinger, who's with me?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Webcam says otherwise. Traffic appeared to be moving fairly easily.


 


yes, well they're not in the mornings.  If they were, you wouldn't have half of Brixton getting off at the Town Hall and walking


----------



## teuchter (Oct 16, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Not necessarily, no.



So. You are resisting giving a straight answer but it seems that you do not actually think it would be realistically possible to provide a public transport service that you would be happy with. And yet you are trying to invoke the familiar "I would use it if it were a viable alternative" argument.


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Actually most of the time I do use it, because I do not own a car, I borrow one from work if I have a particular need (like this weekend) if it's not being used for work purposes (as it is frequently).

I use public transport most of the time because that's my only option.


----------



## christonabike (Oct 16, 2008)

Bike?

North to south London, anywhere, takes about a half an hour, no rushing


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

Nope, not for me, not in London, thanks.


----------



## christonabike (Oct 16, 2008)

Ok

You can't say that public transport is your only option, though

You are just deciding against these options

I prefer a bike over public transport everytime. Fast, healthy, cheap, safe, reliable


----------



## ajdown (Oct 16, 2008)

I don't have a bike, or a car of my own, therefore public transport is my only option.

I can't decide not to use something I don't have a choice of using in the first place.

You like bikes, fine, good for you.  I don't. 

Outside of London, I might well consider getting one for little things like popping to the shops - but there's no point in getting one in London, the benefits do not outweigh the risks.


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Oct 18, 2008)

ajdown said:


> This evening, I will be driving to Lincolnshire.  Nobody in their right mind would do that 120 mile journey by pushbike.



http://www.southwarkcyclists.org.uk/dunwichfaqs.htm


----------



## Crispy (Oct 18, 2008)

I'd have to agree that doing the dunwich dynamo is certainly not something I'd do sane.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 19, 2008)

Little kids do it on halford's mountain bikes! Its more about your attitude to it than being a hell for leather lycra clad thing. What confuses me is that AJ seems to think that he's a more important road user, simply because he's occasionally in a car. Whatever, I'm still convinced he's an ill conceived comedy character.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 19, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> Whatever, I'm still convinced he's an ill conceived comedy character.




I'm inclined to think this myself.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 19, 2008)

Anyway, as for the high street, closing the crossing and fencing off one side of the road = utter chaos on a saturday night


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 19, 2008)

As said previously, getting in and out of Brixton is getting more and more difficult regardless of what time of day I want to get around.

The Tulse Hill one way system, Brixton 'High St', Elephant and Castle all have major works or diversions going on which hold up traffic in lots of different directions, impacting traffic routes for miles.

I'm finding myself taking different routes in the morning and at night to get where I'm going as quickly as possible and it's fucking annoying having to put so much time and thought into going from A - B.

And up to 6 main tube lines are being closed or partially closed every weekend, which just adds to the problem (i.e no tubes, so more people turn to their cars, thus holding up buses moving thru already hindered routes.)

It's probably coincidence, but since our new mayor's arrival London's transport infrastucture is a nightmare....


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 19, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> I'm still convinced he's an ill conceived comedy character.



A paranoid, delusional and frightened comedy character!

He makes me laugh!


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 19, 2008)

..and that Boris is a cheeky fucker!


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 22, 2008)

Well its chaos today with the lack of lights at the Brixton Road / Atlantic Road junction. That and the school kids fighting.

Compounded by me juggling tofu in the middle of the hatched box obv.

AJDown, does being on a bicycle make me a less important road user than you in your occasional car?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 22, 2008)

Oh yeah, that was quite a fight. Shoes being thrown. 12-year old boy who must have been about a foot shorter, doing the "leave it, leave it, it's not worth it" bit


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> Well its chaos today with the lack of lights at the Brixton Road / Atlantic Road junction.



When I came through last night it looked like there had been a traffic-light massacre. They were half-uprooted and lying all over the pavement with cables hanging out of them.



This morning a full on traffic jam all the way down the high street. I was wondering if any car or bus drivers are actually aware that they are not supposed to stop on pedestrian crossings. It makes them ever so slightly difficult to use if you can't even see the green man on the other side on account of several vehicles being in the way.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 22, 2008)

Crazy Kids eh? It seem to all start outside the bus stop by Abbey National as the kids got off the bus,  was quite surprised to see the police turn up, as most of it was just teenage raised voices. Still it kept the over long queue in Abbey distracted for 20 minutes. 

Some of them are still hiding in my work reception now, or 'waiting for a friend' as they've just explained to me. 

And Teuchter - yes, people seem to conveniently forget and think that just edging into the yellow box will be alright for them. It was completely blocked before and I almost dropped the marinated tofu in front of a bus.


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 22, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> It was completely blocked before and I almost dropped the marinated tofu in front of a bus.




Oh well.  I suppose you'll just have to eat it now.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 22, 2008)

Marinade Petrole, with a jus de piss.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> And Teuchter - yes, people seem to conveniently forget and think that just edging into the yellow box will be alright for them. It was completely blocked before and I almost dropped the marinated tofu in front of a bus.



I'm not talking about edging into yellow boxes though. I'm talking about stopping giant lorries/buses/cars right across pedestrian crossings as if they didn't exist at all.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 22, 2008)

Ah yeah, but that always happens at the pedestrian crossing by M&S, I just seem to lazily accept and ignore it nowadays.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 22, 2008)

Is this at school home time cos I've never seen owt in 6 years


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> Ah yeah, but that always happens at the pedestrian crossing by M&S, I just seem to lazily accept and ignore it nowadays.



Sometimes it is satisfying to accidentally bash any cars stopped in the crossing with whatever shopping/implements you happen to be carrying at the time. Perhaps combined with scowling at the drivers.


----------



## snowy_again (Oct 22, 2008)

Left Turn Clyde said:


> Is this at school home time cos I've never seen owt in 6 years



Yup, started around 3.15 ish.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 22, 2008)

snowy_again said:


> Yup, started around 3.15 ish.


Oh!
There was frontin' and shoutin' (and airborne shoes) all across the high street at about 0820 as well. You probably saw the rematch


----------



## ajdown (Oct 22, 2008)

Crispy said:


> Oh!
> There was frontin' and shoutin' (and airborne shoes) all across the high street at about 0820 as well. You probably saw the rematch



That was just kicking off as I went through at 0815 on a 133, outside Morleys.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Oct 22, 2008)

BLDY KIDS - VEGETARIANS THE LOT OF 'EM.

Too much Tofu in their diet - makes 'em violent!!!


----------



## teuchter (Oct 24, 2008)

Some photos from this morning, of Brixton Hill all clogged up with cyclists yet again.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 24, 2008)

teuchter said:


> Some photos from this morning, of Brixton Hill all clogged up with cyclists yet again.


 

oh, you use the same bus stop as me


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 24, 2008)

Is that you in first pic, minnie?


----------



## christonabike (Oct 24, 2008)

Lovely for a cyclist, them roads, just perfect

I like a bit of rain as well, slows me down so I enjoy it more

Cars, pah! You see the same cars with the same people in 'em, (one each car) scowling, even though they know the road will be jammed to feck again


----------



## teuchter (Oct 24, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> oh, you use the same bus stop as me



Not always. It depends on weather conditions.

And whether I spot any loons hanging about in the bus shelter who I want to avoid.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 24, 2008)

teuchter said:


> And whether I spot any loons hanging about in the bus shelter who I want to avoid.


 

I won't tell quimmy you're talking about her in such a fashion


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Oct 24, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> Is that you in first pic, minnie?


 


I wish.  I haven't got that much hair


----------



## quimcunx (Oct 24, 2008)

teuchter said:


> And whether I spot any loons hanging about in the bus shelter who I want to avoid.




It's okay.  I don't think minnie has picked up on it being her you're referring to. 


She probably thinks it's me!  lol.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 19, 2008)

Can anyone tell me why these road works aren't a complete fuk up ?

BrixtonTownCentreImprovements

The only thing in Lambeth's favour is that it looks like it was supposed to drag on into December.  There seems precious little evidence of activity as usual and everyday is road block from hell.

I've this horrible feeling that when the dust has settled there'll just be more congestion.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2008)

The works are being done by TfL, not Lambeth, I think. It's not supposed to be finished until "early 2009".


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 19, 2008)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Can anyone tell me why these road works aren't a complete fuk up ?
> 
> BrixtonTownCentreImprovements
> 
> ...



Madness innit.

When I went to work this morning there was a bus that was only slightly not lined up with the kerb straight and nothing behind it could move.

He was there because he couldn't get in because of Securicor van.  Those bastards really fuck up traffic


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 19, 2008)

Seems to me they're behind



> *Stage 4b – Pavement works* - 12 weeks (August/September/October)
> *Stage 5 – Re-surfacing and lining works* - 3 weeks (November/December).


----------



## happyshopper (Dec 19, 2008)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Can anyone tell me why these road works aren't a complete fuk up ?



a.  TfL, who are doing the work, did not plan to finish the project until "early 2009"

b.  It's already made it much better for pedestrians.


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 19, 2008)

happyshopper said:


> b.  It's already made it much better for pedestrians.




Which is lucky, as we're all having to walk further to get from the bus to the tube station!


----------



## jchanning (Dec 20, 2008)

El Jefe said:


> My bus goes THROUGH brixton, so i get stuck there for 15 minutes every day



Same here, the improvement have been a disaster in my opinion...


----------



## ajdown (Dec 20, 2008)

Perhaps they wouldn't be behind schedule if they actually did some work there?

You'd have thought that, on a project of this size on a major road in/out of London, they might have done something a bit more comprehensive than 3 or 4 guys working from about 10-4 every other Tuesday, or at least that's what it seems like.


----------



## Kanda (Dec 20, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Perhaps they wouldn't be behind schedule if they actually did some work there?
> 
> You'd have thought that, on a project of this size on a major road in/out of London, they might have done something a bit more comprehensive than 3 or 4 guys working from about 10-4 every other Tuesday, or at least that's what it seems like.


 
I came past the Tube after coming out of a Club at 4am a few weeks ago and there were workers digging by the trafic lights there. Certainly not regular hours!!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 20, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Perhaps they wouldn't be behind schedule if they actually did some work there?
> 
> You'd have thought that, on a project of this size on a major road in/out of London, they might have done something a bit more comprehensive than 3 or 4 guys working from about 10-4 every other Tuesday, or at least that's what it seems like.




if this were Whitehall, it would have been finished months ago


----------



## ajdown (Dec 20, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> if this were Whitehall, it would have been finished months ago



If it were anywhere except Lambeth, it would probably have been finished months ago.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 20, 2008)

ajdown said:


> If it were anywhere except Lambeth, it would probably have been finished months ago.





True, bet most tube stations are refurbed quicker than ours as well


----------



## ajdown (Dec 20, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> True, bet most tube stations are refurbed quicker than ours as well



Brixton tube station is the Forth Bridge of underground stations.  It takes so long to refurbish, by the time you finish it's time to start again at the other ehdn.


----------



## happyshopper (Dec 20, 2008)

ajdown said:


> Perhaps they wouldn't be behind schedule if they actually did some work there?




It's not behind schedule. According to TfL, whose project it is, it's "... scheduled to be completed in early 2009."


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 20, 2008)

happyshopper said:


> It's not behind schedule. According to TfL, whose project it is, it's "... scheduled to be completed in early 2009."



I thought when they ripped up the bus stops outside KFC it was to be for 3 weeks.  It has been more than that I'm sure and we're still using the temporary bus stop.


----------



## ajdown (Dec 20, 2008)

happyshopper said:


> It's not behind schedule. According to TfL, whose project it is, it's "... scheduled to be completed in early 2009."



As posted earlier in this thread:

"Stage 4b – Pavement works - 12 weeks (August/September/October) 
Stage 5 – Re-surfacing and lining works - 3 weeks (November/December). "

Pavement works still very far from being done, resurfacing still needed in several places, and no sign of any lining the last time I looked.


----------



## happyshopper (Dec 20, 2008)

ajdown said:


> As posted earlier in this thread:
> 
> "Stage 4b – Pavement works - 12 weeks (August/September/October)
> Stage 5 – Re-surfacing and lining works - 3 weeks (November/December). "



... and has also been explained on this thread, this is a quote from Lambeth. 

The work is being done by TfL.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 21, 2008)

quimcunx said:


> I thought when they ripped up the bus stops outside KFC it was to be for 3 weeks.  It has been more than that I'm sure and we're still using the temporary bus stop.




I went to Brixton today and there was buses stopping outside Woolworth's letting people off, but not letting people on.  There's no fucking roadworks there so why have not just let us on.

I'm getting pissed off with this.


----------



## ash (Dec 21, 2008)

Maybe this is some grand scheme by the owners of Woolies - let the people off to shop but keep the people at the bus stop tempted by the fantastic window dsiplays and they may go in and buy!!


----------



## Greebo (Dec 21, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I'm getting pissed off with this.



You and me both - for all the distance it saves, that temporary bus stop might as well not be there at all (for those who haven't had to walk that far, it's one bus length before the first permanent bus stop on Effra Rd), and the bus drivers ignore it anyway.


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 21, 2008)

Greebo said:


> You and me both - for all the distance it saves, that temporary bus stop might as well not be there at all (for those who haven't had to walk that far, it's one bus length before the first permanent bus stop on Effra Rd), and the bus drivers ignore it anyway.



Um, that's because it is a temporary stop for buses that go up Brixton Hill not Effra Road so Effra road buses would ignore it.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I went to Brixton today and there was buses stopping outside Woolworth's letting people off, but not letting people on.  There's no fucking roadworks there so why have not just let us on.
> 
> I'm getting pissed off with this.



I can see why they don't stop in the high st. during the day when it's busy, but it's a bit silly for them not to be stopping there when the road is quiet, at night and so forth.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 21, 2008)

teuchter said:


> I can see why they don't stop in the high st. during the day when it's busy, but it's a bit silly for them not to be stopping there when the road is quiet, at night and so forth.





As far as I'm concerned, it should be the bus stop for the Nos. 2 and 3 that should be moved to Windrush Square.  It is those buses that go straight up Tulse Hill.  The Brixton Hill buses should be moved to outside the tube so I don't have to carry my shopping too far


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> As far as I'm concerned, it should be the bus stop for the Nos. 2 and 3 that should be moved to Windrush Square.  It is those buses that go straight up Tulse Hill.  The Brixton Hill buses should be moved to outside the tube so I don't have to carry my shopping too far



I agree.


----------



## ajdown (Dec 21, 2008)

I'm sure some rearranging of where the buses actually stop could be done fairly easily, to make it a lot more convenient.

As you say, there's 3 bus stops; one for buses going up Brixton Hill, one for buses going straight on along Effra Road, and a third stop for terminating buses, rail replacement services, and buses that go anywhere else except up Brixton Hill or Effra Road.

It's annoying having to hang around in the middle of several stops, and having to keep running between the two trying to get on whichever bus that's got there first - only to be pushed to the back of the queue by people that have no concept of the British way of things.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 21, 2008)

happyshopper said:


> a.  TfL, who are doing the work, did not plan to finish the project until "early 2009"
> 
> b.  It's already made it much better for pedestrians.



There seems to be precious little 'finishing' going on.  I guess that was my point.  Like it's turning into the tube refurb project, which, as far i can see never finished!

Sure it's good to have bigger pavements but if it ends up gridlocked maybe that's not so good.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2008)

The TfL road sign that's been there several months notifying of the roadworks says they are due to finish in January 2009. I'd suggest that we can deduce from this that the works are due to finish in January 2009.


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 21, 2008)

How very literal of you.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Dec 21, 2008)

teuchter said:


> The TfL road sign that's been there several months notifying of the roadworks says they are due to finish in January 2009. I'd suggest that we can deduce from this that the works are due to finish in January 2009.




Yes, but it still says on the website



> "Stage 4b – Pavement works - 12 weeks (August/September/October)
> 
> Stage 5 – Re-surfacing and lining works - 3 weeks (November/December). "


----------



## happyshopper (Dec 21, 2008)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Yes, but it still says on the website



Please see my post #364


----------



## lang rabbie (Dec 21, 2008)

teuchter said:


> The TfL road sign that's been there several months notifying of the roadworks says they are due to finish in January 2009. I'd suggest that we can deduce from this that the works are due to finish in January 2009.



The original project press release in June and the leaflet suggested that work is continuing until March 2009.


----------



## Winot (Dec 21, 2008)

ajdown said:


> I'm sure some rearranging of where the buses actually stop could be done fairly easily, to make it a lot more convenient.
> 
> As you say, there's 3 bus stops; one for buses going up Brixton Hill, one for buses going straight on along Effra Road, and a third stop for terminating buses, rail replacement services, and buses that go anywhere else except up Brixton Hill or Effra Road.
> 
> It's annoying having to hang around in the middle of several stops, and having to keep running between the two trying to get on whichever bus that's got there first - only to be pushed to the back of the queue by people that have no concept of the British way of things.



This makes a lot of sense (minus the customary jingoism of course).


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2008)

It seems to be different wherever you look.




> - 12 December 2008 - we'll stop work for two weeks so that we can keep the pavements and roads open for two weeks before Christmas
> - Early 2009 - finish all work to the town centre


http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/roadsandpublicspaces/6599.aspx

Hmm.

In any case, once they have finished this phase they will start on phase three, digging up Windrush Sqauare and removng the gyratory system around St Matthews, which presumably will also cause disruption.


----------



## lang rabbie (Dec 21, 2008)

teuchter said:


> In any case, once they have finished this phase they will start on phase three, digging up Windrush Sqauare and removng the gyratory system around St Matthews, which presumably will also cause disruption.



Permanently.  

The traffic modelling for phase 2 now being completed suggests that on its own it will  improve bus timings.

Phase 3 -  Brixton Central Square - will apparently make many bus journeys slower meaning that the net overall effect of spending all this money will be "neutral".

Turn again, Boris.   Scrap the Square!


----------



## quimcunx (Dec 21, 2008)

lang rabbie said:


> Permanently.
> 
> The traffic modelling for phase 2 now being completed suggests that on its own it will  improve bus timings.
> 
> ...



And if the sceptics are proved right and phase 2 doesn't improve bus timings then the end net effect will in fact be negative. 

Excellent.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2008)

lang rabbie said:


> Permanently.
> 
> The traffic modelling for phase 2 now being completed suggests that on its own it will  improve bus timings.
> 
> ...



That's interesting, I didn't know that.

Although in principle I'm in favour of investments in public space and all that, I wouldn't actually mind if the current proposals for the square were scrapped. Somehow I don't know if they are really what Brixton needs or wants. There's not really a shortage of space right now and I'm inclined to think the money would be better spent improving what's there rather than extending it. Maybe.


----------



## ajdown (Jan 5, 2009)

So ... now that most of the roadworks appear to have gone, is the area any better for driving through - or is it just back to what it was before they dug it all up, giving the impression it's somehow improved?

I'm glad they sorted out the bus stops so all the buses going up the hill are from the same stop, but apart from that I can't honestly say I've noticed much of an improvement justified by all the disruption.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 5, 2009)

The point is not whether it's any better for driving through. It's whether it's any better for walking through, which it is. If it's made no discernable difference to the traffic flow, then the scheme is a success.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 5, 2009)

Aye, this phase of the scheme was all about improving things for peds.
The next phase will involve remodelling the main junction, which will have a much bigger effect on traffic.


----------



## ajdown (Jan 5, 2009)

So the important bit is still to come.  Ok.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 5, 2009)

How were the buses flowing out of Brixton this Morning, from the St Matthews down past the Academy?

It was my first day back at work today and the bus stop I use on Tulse Hill was closed, so I headed thru the park and got the 68 to work.


----------



## pboi (Jan 5, 2009)

I dont like the patches inbetween the slabs where its just filled with road tarmac. with a little more effort the pavements could look so much better


----------



## malice (Jan 5, 2009)

Nanker Phelge said:


> How were the buses flowing out of Brixton this Morning, from the St Matthews down past the Academy?
> 
> It was my first day back at work today and the bus stop I use on Tulse Hill was closed, so I headed thru the park and got the 68 to work.



I got the 59 from the Hill through brixton, and it seemed pretty good - certainly back to pre-roadworks speeds, if not a little better, which was good considering the weather was bad, though I think the traffic might still be a bit light post holidays (when do schools go back?).


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 5, 2009)

I stayed on the bus instead of getting off at the Town Hall and it seemed faster than getting off.  Traffic seemed lighter, but that is probably down to not everyone being back at work yet.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 5, 2009)

pboi said:


> I dont like the patches inbetween the slabs where its just filled with road tarmac. with a little more effort the pavements could look so much better


It's a shoddy job all round. Lots of mis-aligned slabs and badly leveled bits you can trip on.


----------



## se5 (Jan 5, 2009)

malice said:


> the traffic might still be a bit light post holidays (when do schools go back?).



The schools are generally back today although some might be having staff training days today (and so no pupils) so Tuesday or Wednesday this week should be normal


----------



## netbob (Jan 5, 2009)

I was planning on doing a tour with this: http://www.mysociety.org/2008/12/10/fixmystreet-iphone/ once it's done.

They still havent done Electric Lane yet either which has looked like the Somme for years now.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 5, 2009)

pboi said:


> I dont like the patches inbetween the slabs where its just filled with road tarmac.



They may not be entirely finished yet. I suspect you'll find that they get filled in when they start doing Electric Avenue. Maybe.


----------



## Bob (Jan 5, 2009)

teuchter said:


> That's interesting, I didn't know that.
> 
> Although in principle I'm in favour of investments in public space and all that, I wouldn't actually mind if the current proposals for the square were scrapped. Somehow I don't know if they are really what Brixton needs or wants. There's not really a shortage of space right now and I'm inclined to think the money would be better spent improving what's there rather than extending it. Maybe.



I'm with you on that. They've budgeted something crazy like £7m for the Windrush Square project.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 5, 2009)

7m!!! Put that towards a Overground station above the existing platforms or something with real tangible value ffs!


----------



## teuchter (Jan 5, 2009)

Perhaps we can persuade Boris to do Parliament Square after all, in exchange for not doing Brixton.


----------



## epaul07 (Jan 5, 2009)

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the whole idea for the square come from the late nineties / early 2000s events to reclaim the streets? 

http://www.urban75.org/brixton/features/reclaim.html

Having seen events staged in the existing areas, and seen it when the whole area is an underused desolate (which is most of the time), the space that could benefit from some improvements. Particularly since there aren't that many open areas around Brixton... It will be interesting to see how things take shape this year... 

http://www.grossmax.com/projects.asp?n=Squares&x=3&y=26


----------



## pboi (Jan 6, 2009)

isnt it just full or drunks and dealers?


----------



## ajdown (Jan 6, 2009)

pboi said:


> isnt it just full or drunks and dealers?



That's the bit outside the Ritzy, Windrush Square is that little bit of grass slightly further up, by the church, where the temporary bus stops were until recently.


----------



## Not a Vet (Jan 6, 2009)

So, back to work today after an extended (and unplanned) holiday and discovered that they've dug up a massive part of the pavement outside KFC. No actual work going on, just a pile of bricks and an impossibly tight diversion or you can walk on the road and be squished.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 6, 2009)

Not a Vet said:


> So, back to work today after an extended (and unplanned) holiday and discovered that they've dug up a massive part of the pavement outside KFC. No actual work going on, just a pile of bricks and an impossibly tight diversion or you can walk on the road and be squished.


 

Noticed that on way to work this morning.  At least we've got our bus stops back so I don't care now


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 6, 2009)

It was probably doing me good, all that walking up Brixton Hill of an evening.


----------



## ajdown (Jan 6, 2009)

... and taking out one lane of traffic, causing a *new* bottleneck.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 6, 2009)

ajdown said:


> I'm glad they sorted out the bus stops so all the buses going up the hill are from the same stop.


 

Don't know why they changed them in the first place.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 6, 2009)

Crispy said:


> It's a shoddy job all round. Lots of mis-aligned slabs and badly leveled bits you can trip on.


 

Yep, I think the relevant people need to be contacted and told what a shite job the slab-layers have done


----------



## christonabike (Jan 6, 2009)

How the fuck can they not pave one side of the road from the Beehive to the KFC in one 24 hour period?

Instead we have this situation?

Wankers


----------



## teuchter (Jan 6, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... and taking out one lane of traffic, causing a *new* bottleneck.



The traffic seemed to be running fine this morning.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 6, 2009)

Maybe it'll be in a constant state of dig up, repave for next few years?
Part of El Gordos 100,000 new jobs scheme


----------



## teuchter (Jan 6, 2009)

christonabike said:


> How the fuck can they not pave one side of the road from the Beehive to the KFC in one 24 hour period?



Yeah and they should have been able to refurbish the tube station overnight, too.


----------



## christonabike (Jan 7, 2009)

> Yeah and they should have been able to refurbish the tube station overnight, too.



Don't think so, do you?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 7, 2009)

christonabike said:


> Don't think so, do you?



No, it would be as silly to expect such a thing as to expect all the repaving to be done in 24hrs.



By the way, this morning they seemed to be filling in some of the gaps which have just got tarmac with proper paving stones.

I am still a bit curious about all the little circles cut into the paving outside the tube entrance. Some have got lights in them and some haven't. The ones without don't seem to be arranged in a very logical pattern. I wonder if whoever was cutting them got a bit trigger-happy.


----------



## christonabike (Jan 7, 2009)

> No, it would be as silly to expect such a thing as to expect all the repaving to be done in 24hrs.



I feel it could have been done much quicker, much like the tube station refurbishment

Anyway, 24 hours is different to overnight and I still don't think it would be that much of an ask


----------



## teuchter (Jan 7, 2009)

christonabike said:


> I feel it could have been done much quicker, much like the tube station refurbishment
> 
> Anyway, 24 hours is different to overnight and I still don't think it would be that much of an ask



It's not just a case of pulling them up and putting new ones down. They rebuilt all of the kerbs to new alignments and put in new bus-stops, drains, traffic lights and lamp-posts. You can't put all the new paving in until you've finished digging about doing all the work that that entails. And add to this the fact that you have to keep the pavements and road open all the time so you can't pull it all up at the same time anyway.

There's just no way at all that would have been possible in 24hrs.


----------



## christonabike (Jan 7, 2009)

I feel I have to agree with you, putting it like that


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 9, 2009)

Back to getting off at the Town Hall this morning.  Guess everyone is back at work now.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 9, 2009)

Straight through with no holdup for me this morning.
But that might have been because I overslept and was two hours late for work.

They are digging up the road in places once more, which may be part of the reason it's clogged up again.


----------



## Bob (Jan 9, 2009)

hipipol said:


> Maybe it'll be in a constant state of dig up, repave for next few years?
> Part of El Gordos 100,000 new jobs scheme



I'm sure that's been happening already


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 10, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Back to getting off at the Town Hall this morning.  Guess everyone is back at work now.




I think that was probably more due to the traffic being fucked up because of the burst main


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 11, 2009)

Let's hope so.


----------



## happyshopper (Jan 12, 2009)

*Notice of Resurfacing Work*

This will cheer everyone up.

I've just had a notice through the door from the contractors telling us that there will be resurfacing work in Brixton Road between Coldharbour Lane and Stockwell Road for two weeks, commencing on Monday, 19th January. Working hours will be between 8.00 pm to 5.00 am.


----------



## quimcunx (Jan 12, 2009)

*is cheered up*


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

happyshopper said:


> This will cheer everyone up.
> 
> I've just had a notice through the door from the contractors telling us that there will be resurfacing work in Brixton Road between Coldharbour Lane and Stockwell Road for two weeks, commencing on Monday, 19th January. Working hours will be between 8.00 pm to 5.00 am.


 

Why can't they do it in the evenings?  I'm sure they resurfaced before at night-time


----------



## Kanda (Jan 12, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Why can't they do it in the evenings?  I'm sure they resurfaced before at night-time



Re-read the times...


----------



## Kanda (Jan 12, 2009)

Not a Vet said:


> So, back to work today after an extended (and unplanned) holiday and discovered that they've dug up a massive part of the pavement outside KFC. No actual work going on, just a pile of bricks and an impossibly tight diversion or you can walk on the road and be squished.



One way of moving the dealers along I guess


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

Kanda said:


> Re-read the times...


 




Ooops 


I wish they'd resurface Brixton Hill and let it dry properly this time, it's dangerous tripping over all those humps in the road


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Ooops
> 
> 
> I wish they'd resurface Brixton Hill and let it dry properly this time, it's dangerous tripping over all those humps in the road



What humps?

Do you mean the ones by bus-stops going up the hill? They are caused by buses repeatedly taking off from the same spot.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

teuchter said:


> What humps?
> 
> Do you mean the ones by bus-stops going up the hill? They are caused by buses repeatedly taking off from the same spot.


 

erm, not sure what you mean.  The road surface is warped, kind of as if traffic went onto the tarmac before it was dried properly.

It's especially hazardous crossing from near the Prison to over the road if you don't use the crossing itself and also from the bus stop outside the Marie Stopes Clinic if you cross straight over without using the crossing.

OK, so the logical thing would be to use the crossing, but not everyone does tha


----------



## ovaltina (Jan 12, 2009)

Kanda said:


> One way of moving the dealers along I guess



True. One of them tried to hassle me on CHL a few days ago and got an earful. "It's too bloody cold to hang about - I'm not _INTERESTED!"_


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2009)

It's caused by buses and other heavy vehicles starting moving. As the wheels start to turn they make the bus go forwards but also make the tarmac go in the opposite direction ever so slightly. Over time that stretches and warps it.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

teuchter said:


> It's caused by buses and other heavy vehicles starting moving. As the wheels start to turn they make the bus go forwards but also make the tarmac go in the opposite direction ever so slightly. Over time that stretches and warps it.


 

Well maybe they should use someone stronger?


----------



## ajdown (Jan 12, 2009)

It's probably the council trying to save money again.

There are different standards for road surfacing, depending on the amount of traffic using the road, based on the depth of asphalt etc.

Obviously something like Brixton Hill is going to be right up there in the heavy traffic bracket, but it's probably surfaced in lighter standards than necessary - especially when bits are dug up by utility services and replaced in the cheapest manner possible; as long as it's flat with the road surface that's all that matters.

That's why there's big lumps and potholes missing especially round St Matthew's Church - heavy traffic, large vehicles, constantly, wearing away at the road.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

How come the crossings aren't warped?


----------



## Crispy (Jan 12, 2009)

it's TFl, not the council. The A23 is part of the TFL road network all the way to the south edge of croydon borough.
www.etgs.org.uk/site/pdf/TFL_Base_Map_Master.pdf


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> How come the crossings aren't warped?



Because traffic doesn't stop on them. Or isn't supposed to, at least. Because it doesn't stop on them, it doesn't start off from them.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

teuchter said:


> Because traffic doesn't stop on them. Or isn't supposed to, at least. Because it doesn't stop on them, it doesn't start off from them.


 

so it's only starting and stopping that causes this problem?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> so it's only starting and stopping that causes this problem?



Well, mainly. That's when the greatest force is being applied to the wheels and the road surface. That's why it's worst near traffic lights and bus stops.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Well maybe they should use someone stronger?









To get the buses moving, do you mean?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

teuchter said:


> Well, mainly. That's when the greatest force is being applied to the wheels and the road surface. That's why it's worst near traffic lights and bus stops.


 

I just thought they hadn't let it set properly before allowing traffic back on to it


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

teuchter said:


> To get the buses moving, do you mean?


 

No, to stop it warping


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> No, to stop it warping



I'm not sure how he or she is going to achieve this.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 12, 2009)

buses should have 10 wheels on each side, to spread the load.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

teuchter said:


> I'm not sure how he or she is going to achieve this.


 

Make the tarmac stronger


----------



## snowy_again (Jan 12, 2009)

It always happens - try going across Tower Bridge and see the tidal wave effect on the left hand side of the lane.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 12, 2009)

snowy_again said:


> It always happens - try going across Tower Bridge and see the tidal wave effect on the left hand side of the lane.


 

We obviously need maglev buses to prevent further damage


----------



## snowy_again (Jan 12, 2009)

Just extend the Brixton Road flood and get Gondolas?


----------

