Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 18 of 18

Thread: Liverpool Congestion Charge

  1. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Waterways View Post
    Cities have to reach emission levels. Flow could be good but emissions high, so action is needed in congestion charging, encouraging electric and hybrid vehicles or pedestrianization. Ken Livingstone never met London's emission levels, even with congestion charging. That meant the charge was too low.
    If you improve the flow of traffic you will reduce the pollution. Many recent road improvements have congested traffic.

    Liverpool has enough pedestrianisation - do we need any more?

    John

  2. #17
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by irishseashipping.com View Post
    If you improve the flow of traffic you will reduce the pollution. Many recent road improvements have congested traffic.

    Liverpool has enough pedestrianisation - do we need any more?
    Getting rid of The Strand and having seamless pedestrianization from the docks to the city would be nice and it gets rid of the urban motorway - the New York Times criticised the wide fast road.

    Discouraging cars and improving the underground will make matters better in a really big way all around.

    Eliminating car parking from new residential blocks should be done too. This only encourages people to own cars unnecessarily.
    Last edited by Waterways; 12-17-2008 at 11:57 AM.
    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

  3. #18
    Senior Member Waterways's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,924
    Blog Entries
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Broliv View Post
    Totally agree with you.
    On the wider view. Look at the new metro systems in Spain. Bilboa, Valencia, Alicanti, Sevilla, Palma have all new metro systems, partially underground. Barcelona and Madrid have extended their metros extensively. Most of this is within the past 20 years. The metro systems have greatly assisting these cities progression.

    In the UK, we have London, Liverpool and Glasgow that have underground metro systems. Apart from London, nothing has been done to Glasgow or Liverpool's underground sections for decades. Liverpool has done some easy extensions on the peripheral overground sections. Although existing overground lines were merged into a surface metro system in Tyne & Weir. All we have done is implement silly, slow congestion causing trams in place like Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham and Croydon.

    We don't have much of a clue really. Rapid transit is the way, as the Spanish assessed. It alleviates cars in the centres and gets people around fast.

    The new Amsterdam at Liverpool?
    Save Liverpool Docks and Waterways - Click

    Deprived of its unique dockland waters Liverpool
    becomes a Venice without canals, just another city, no
    longer of special interest to anyone, least of all the
    tourist. Would we visit a modernised Venice of filled in
    canals to view its modern museum describing
    how it once was?


    Giving Liverpool a full Metro - CLICK
    Rapid-transit rail: Everton, Liverpool & Arena - CLICK

    Save Royal Iris - Sign Petition

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •