Have your say London,

Log in
Register
Community guide
Advanced search
 
 
 

Transport & travel

Posted by: openwallet10 on 28/02/09 at 02:35 PM
Could we get some joined up thinking here - either motorbikes can use all of them or none at all. A 6" graphic of a bike isn't that noticeable.
We have enough to contend with trying to stay alive avoiding car drivers STILL using mobile phones, cyclists (not all) who seems to think they have a God given right to ignore all road signs/traffic lights, pedestrians with a death wish stepping out from anywhere - invariably looking the wrong way, roads that put most farm tracks to shame and a plethora of graffiti known as road signs.

Finally, can anyone explain the reasoning/logic behind a 24 hour bus lane?




Posted by: Nighter on 28/02/09 at 05:21 PM
> Could we get some joined up thinking here - either
> motorbikes can use all of them or none at all. A 6"
> graphic of a bike isn't that noticeable.
> We have enough to contend with trying to stay alive
> avoiding car drivers STILL using mobile phones,
> cyclists (not all) who seems to think they have a God
> given right to ignore all road signs/traffic lights,
> pedestrians with a death wish stepping out from
> anywhere - invariably looking the wrong way, roads
> that put most farm tracks to shame and a plethora of
> graffiti known as road signs.
>
> Finally, can anyone explain the reasoning/logic
> behind a 24 hour bus lane?
>
>
>
>


24 hour bus lanes may be for 24 hour bus routes or even night bus routes. In the central area its not unusual to find heavy traffic during the night, especially at weekends so maybe thats why they exist.
Posted by: Chickamauga on 28/02/09 at 07:18 PM
> >
> >
> > Finally, can anyone explain the reasoning/logic
> > behind a 24 hour bus lane?
> >
> >
> >
> >

> 24 hour bus lanes may be for 24 hour bus routes or
> even night bus routes. In the central area its not
> unusual to find heavy traffic during the night,
> especially at weekends so maybe thats why they exist.



No argument there nighter, but that doesn't explain the 24 hour rule on roads like Jamaica Road Bermondsey for example.
Virtually empty after 23.00 hours but the bus lane is "live" all night. One is left with the inescapable thought that it is there purely to discourage anyone from using it to drive to and from work.
Posted by: TravisBickle on 28/02/09 at 07:38 PM
> Could we get some joined up thinking here - either
> motorbikes can use all of them or none at all. A 6"
> graphic of a bike isn't that noticeable.
>
>
> Finally, can anyone explain the reasoning/logic
> behind a 24 hour bus lane?



Welcome to the world of black cab drivers as regards bus lane usage. You can use this one but not that one. You can use the one at the Angel from 19.00 until 07.00, but not during the day when traffic is heavier and it would make more sense to be allowed in it. Exclusion from the bus lane at Aldgate High St. is understandable, the high number of cabs in that area would restrict the flow of buses, but at the Angel? Give me a break!
While I'm not comfortable with motorcycles squeezing by me on both sides in bus lanes I can't see where they would be impeding the flow of buses in lanes from which they are excluded.
As for the logic behind 24 hour bus lanes, go figure, particularly on roads where there are no buses after midnight.
Posted by: openwallet10 on 01/03/09 at 09:34 PM
Of course, it has absolutely nothing to do with cctv & coining a quick £60.00 odd from an unsuspecting motorist and everything to do with easing the flow of traffic & cutting down on pollution. I think not.
Wandsworth Bridge is the same - brimming with buses all the time.

In fact the only times I've witnessed the bus lane busy is when what seems to be half the Met there generally causing unnecessary hold ups pulling over endless vehicles.


Posted by: london_boy on 06/03/09 at 01:45 PM
What I don't understand is why the privately owned companies that run London's buses get to use this dedicated infrastructure for free.
Posted by: prj45 on 04/04/09 at 07:27 AM
>london_doy

>What I don't understand is why the privately owned companies that run London's buses get to use this dedicated infrastructure for free.

They might be private companies, but they're providing a public service.
Posted by: Nighter on 04/04/09 at 04:33 PM
> >london_doy
> >What I don't understand is why the privately owned

> companies that run London's buses get to use this
> dedicated infrastructure for free.
>
> They might be private companies, but they're
> providing a public service.


The bus routes are operated on behalf of TFL.