please empty your brain below

[off topic] And I was sure you were going to write about the Orbit slide today...
I'm sure you're familiar with the concept of induced demand and its better looking twin reduced demand. Basically the corollary to build it and they will come is knock it down and they will go away. Wikipedia has several examples listed on its 'Disappeaing Traffic' article. I'm sorry can't get the link to copy.

Perhaps this is what TfL have in mind, although it wouldn't fit well with proposed increases in cross Thames road capacity.
Disappearing Traffic article (Wikipedia)
Grasp the nettle, and pull the flyover down. It is past it's sell by date, and does not carry much traffic, compared to 1980's when I used to cycle over it (yes before cycling was fashionable) it was a car park and 2 lanes each direction.Now there is significantly more traffic eastbound at ground level.
A decent junction at ground level would be significantly cheaper in the long run than all these patches --2 different bike lanes, 3 modifications, & etc, and don't forget that no peds have died but it could improve their lot, but cyclists have died when proven that they jumped red lights.
There's similar work going on about the Vauxhall Gyratory - the issues are much the same and the problems are too. My concern is that even if Vauxhall is made more pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly, there will be knock-on effects for the broader area. Getting people out of cars and on to foot and bike is today's fashion, just as clearing pedestrians out of the way and making everything as easy as possible for drivers was the fashion in the '60s and '70s. Let's hope this time it works a bit better for everyone.
Removal of the flyover would not necessarily make the traffic flow less well. It depends on what the main flows are. If there is more traffic switching between the A11 and the A12 than there is carrying straight along the A11, the space freed up by removal of the flyover, and in particular its long approach ramps, can be put to better use by making more space for turning movements to avoid conflict with each other, and with cyclists and pedestrians.
Compare the Hyde Park Corner underpass, which would carry a lot more traffic (and therefore remove more from the gyratory) if it ran north/south, connecting Park Lane to Grosvenor Place, than its actual east/west alignment from Knightsbridge to Picadilly, and the queues on the narrow slip roads on those two streets necessitated by the space taken by the under-used underpass ramps.
"The shortcut exists, why remove it?"

This is the trend now everywhere, like it or not. I for one don't.
I have seen two examples recently: Hamburger allee in Hanover, where a flyover was removed, and more recently in Budapest, where an underpass was filled in to make pedestrians and motorists "equal".
@Lorenzo - if only the traffic would 'disappear'.

The city council, in their 'wisdom', put a bus lane on one of the main roads into Portsmouth. Result - even more gridlock than usual around that road.

They subsequently took the bus lane out. Now bus passengers are stuck in the traffic and considering going back to their cars. Trouble is too many of the people who work in Portsmouth live off the main island.
Removing gyratories really does seem to be in fashion. Waltham Forest are proposing to get rid of the massive Whipps Cross roundabout - which gets cars round quickly, but isn't much fun on a bike, and requires quite lengthy diversions to cross on foot.

I think it's a bit cheaper and less chaos-causing than removing a flyover, though.
The bus lane approaching Kew Bridge was removed at the request of the bus operator because it was making matters worse. Problem was, with all traffic except buses confined to one lane on the bridge itself, the queues were twice as long and were blocking back past the previous junction, delaying everything, including buses, long before they ever got as far as the beginning of the bus lane.

Worth removing the short cut if the space it takes could be used to better effect for something else: e.g making more space for traffic (foot, human-powered, or mechanically propelled) on busier routes. How much traffic uses the flyover, and how much is turning between the A11 and A12 or vice versa.

"When the Bow Interchange was essentially a motorway junction, a roundabout made perfect sense."

The signs on the East Cross Route may have changed colour in May 2000, and an "(M)" (and a zero) removed from the number, but the East Cross Route (built in 1973) has actually been much busier since the link road between Hackney and Redbridge opened (Oct 1999), linking it to the M11. Until then it was a road to nowhere much (specifically, it ended at the Hackney Marshes)
The flyover is an eyesore and an obstruction between two communities. Imagine if you lived your whole life in the red brick flats on the corner of the roundabout where northbound meets the route to Bow Road. You remember daylight streaming in and a view (albeit industrial), then a monstrosity is thrown up. Now imagine that being pulled down. New buildings in Denmark ensure a minimum standard of window space to minimalise depression. Imagine how uplifting it would feel to suddenly have that light back again.

The whole motorway from the Blackwall tunnel should be covered to allow communities to be r connected again. Look at the state of the links between the Lansbury estates/Balfron Tower areas in Popular and the Aberfeldy.
"The whole motorway from the Blackwall tunnel should be covered to allow communities to be reconnected again."
Hang on: I think you're stretching a point to suggest the Blackwall Tunnel Northern Approach road split existing communities. The road closely follows the Lee Navigation, which is just as much of an obstacle to east west coimmunication as the road is - albeit less obtrusive. The only large community between the Lee and the A12 is the Aberfeldy estate, most of which was built after the road.
Then let them be connected for the first time then. Give people convenience and fresh air to breathe.
I would agree with that, but it would be re-writing history to claim to be reuniting communities that sprang up after the barrier between them was built!

The few bits of "Motorway Box" that were actually built, and much of the bits that were not, did make some attempt not to divide existing communities, usually by running parallel to orbital railway lines which already formed a barrier.

The Westcombe Park area was a notable exception, split asunder by the Blackwall Tunnel southern approach road. (WestBOURNE Park did rather better - at least the Westway was built on stilts!)

Hi. I'll have to look this one up. I used to live in Portsmouth. I assume you're talking about the road that comes in by the Hilsea Lido.

I'm not quite sure what you are arguing though. On the one hand you say that traffic didn't disappear, but on the other the result of the removal of the scheme may be more cars. Perhaps the scheme needed more time. I remember a project in Cambridge in the 80's (yes I lived there too) that narrowed Mill Road railway bridge down to one lane (alternating direction with traffic signals) for motorised vehicles. The project was abandoned after a very short while after howls of media protest. I believe it wasn't given long enough to work.
Just hope they're going to arrange it so that pedestrian walkways and cycle paths are not adjacent - the number of pedestrians who don't realise that a path with a styalised bike picture on it means that it isn't for them, then give you a mouthfull when you ring your bell at them!

Even worse are the parents with free-range children in such situations.

& yes, I know some cyclists willfully whip along pedestrian walkways too.
Build two temporary single lane bridges either side of the flyover (3m for cars plus a 2.5m emergency edge). Knock down the flyover. Remodel the junction. Remove the temporary single lanes. Simples.

TridentScan | Privacy Policy