Largest housing rally ever across the UK

cells

ukcarper wrote: »

Don't you think traffic problems are serious I had to travel from Surrey to various places in West London and sometimes the 35 mile journey took 3hrs. I can't see adding more traffic to those roads will help anyone.

The only time I can recall that I used to get quite !!!!ed off with traffic in London is when I used to go from NW London to NE London via the A406

For a while it was horrific due to road works. I got caught up in 2-3 hour jam most nights and after a days work that really is crap

However after a few days of that horror I spent an hour or two on google maps and found an alternative route which was during the evening faster than my normal route. Even when the road works were complete and the horror traffic was gone I kept to the old route as it was about 10 mins faster and a nicer drive plus I figured me taking that less known route is one less car on the more congested route most people used



I can't see adding more traffic to those roads will help anyone.


Yes but whats that got to do with housing? London population is increasing by 100,000 a year and those people need to move about. Its not much better or worse transport wise if those 100,000 cram into existing homes which is what is happening or if they move into new builds

ukcarper

I can see that neither have you have commuted from outside of the London. Try driving up the A3 or M3 in the morning or catching a train Waterloo from Surrey. The M3 is being improved at the moment removing hard shoulder but as far I know no improvements are planned for the A316.

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

roads and rail are being improved all the time : one can hardly drive anywhere without seeing improvement to motorway or major roads

similarly rail links are being improved all the time

yes infrastructure tends to lag behind but nevertheless traffic flows pretty well most of the time.

people adapt to traffic: start earlier or later and spread the rush hour(s) or work from home etc.

I see very little in the way of major road improvements in my area. I find it strange that you have no confidence in the planning system ability to provide houses but every confidence in its ability to provide require infrastructure.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

I see very little in the way of major road improvements in my area. I find it strange that you have no confidence in the planning system ability to provide houses but every confidence in its ability to provide require infrastructure.

I have little confidence in the politicians wish to free up land for more building.
The lack of sufficient house building is a demonstrable fact.

The simple facts are that there is a lot of road and rail improvement being made all over the country. Motorways are all being changed to allow use of the hard shoulder : not an ideal solution but a reasonable one that improves capacity.

Plenty more to do but to use poor infrastructure to stop housing development doesn't make sense.

London is building xrail: tubes are being improved and extended, overground too has been vastly improved over the last few years.
I know south of London less well so I can't really comment but have journey times really fallen significantly over the last 10 years or so?

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

I have little confidence in the politicians wish to free up land for more building.
The lack of sufficient house building is a demonstrable fact.

The simple facts are that there is a lot of road and rail improvement being made all over the country. Motorways are all being changed to allow use of the hard shoulder : not an ideal solution but a reasonable one that improves capacity.

Plenty more to do but to use poor infrastructure to stop housing development doesn't make sense.

London is building xrail: tubes are being improved and extended, overground too has been vastly improved over the last few years.
I know south of London less well so I can't really comment but have journey times really fallen significantly over the last 10 years or so?

The problem is the sites being proposed have poor transport links and no major road improvements planned.

The areas of Surrey where there is green belt that could be used have poor links and no major road or rail improvements planned.

Journey times have fallen over the last 10 years. Personally I would rather stand on an overcrowded train than drive into London but my job didn't allow that so I had to drive.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

The problem is the sites being proposed have poor transport links and no major road improvements planned.

The areas of Surrey where there is green belt that could be used have poor links and no major road or rail improvements planned.

Journey times have fallen over the last 10 years. Personally I would rather stand on an overcrowded train than drive into London but my job didn't allow that so I had to drive.

given an option of building nice houses but suffering poor transport links and not building more nice houses, I would prefer to build.


how much have journey times fallen?

in the old days when I did drive into SW London, there were always huge delays at all the bridges: are they worse now?

westernpromise

cells wrote: »

not forgetting that this £3.6B cost not only gets us a second M25 but also about 100,000-man-years of work (or 10,000 jobs for 10 years) which contribute back a big chunk of that £3.6B cost

No it doesn't. The £3.6 billion comes out of the wage packets of taxpayers who now have £3.6 billion less to spend. So it eliminates 10,000 jobs for 10 years somewhere else.

So the question is, do we let people keep the money they've earned and spend it as they see fit, or do we take £3.6 billion off them, letting £1.8 billion stick to the fingers of civil servants, and pay the rest to Polish labourers?

Apparently it costs libraries £90 to buy a book. It's that efficient, public sector procurement.

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

given an option of building nice houses but suffering poor transport links and not building more nice houses, I would prefer to build.


how much have journey times fallen?

in the old days when I did drive into SW London, there were always huge delays at all the bridges: are they worse now?

Does it have to be a choice and there is no point building properties if it takes you an hour to get 3 miles down the road.


The A3 is solid around Guildford most days and before M25 junction.

cells

ukcarper wrote: »

I can see that neither have you have commuted from outside of the London. Try driving up the A3 or M3 in the morning or catching a train Waterloo from Surrey. The M3 is being improved at the moment removing hard shoulder but as far I know no improvements are planned for the A316.

For a few years I used to do zone 3 up to the M25 and then to Hitchin and that was at peak times and most of the time it was fine.

I don't doubt there are traffic issues but its not universal and has nothing to do with housing

ukcarper

cells wrote: »

For a few years I used to do zone 3 up to the M25 and then to Hitchin and that was at peak times and most of the time it was fine.

I don't doubt there are traffic issues but its not universal and has nothing to do with housing

Going out of London ?

I can only speak for south west London and it's bad most of the time. If there are routes in that are ok they should be identified and property built there.

In the morning there is normally a 2-3 mile queue on the A3 approaching the M25 what effect do you think another thousand cars will have on that.