Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-...uld-pay-tolls/

Why is it, everything that Boris aims to do - is charging the public for the use in using it.

I was born in Hammersmith, and know the Broadway, the flyover very well. Like all main town centres, he would like a tunnel built under it

Yes, there is a flyover Hammersmith Broadway, but if it is maintained properly. Then it will last for years.

Yes, the Broadway is busy, but there is other ways he can waste money on.

re: Another crazy idea from Boris [Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel]
 

This is worth doing a proper feasibility study on. If the evidence indicates it's a bad idea hopefully it stays on the drawing board.

re: Another crazy idea from Boris [Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel]
 

The problem is that its a 50+ year old reinforced concrete structure, and the time will come in the next couple of decades where it will have to be replaced. You can't just keep patching it up indefinitely.

When that time comes, you're left with a big question, how to replace the flyover while still keeping the traffic moving. It might actually be faster and cheaper to build a replacement tunnel rather than try and replace the flyover in-situ.

Regarding tolls, that's an aside regarding how you'd finance such a scheme, especially as the A4 is now one of TfL's roads, and no longer a national transport priority.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

Tolls can be a good thing. They bring in extra money and that can help with repairs and upkeep. Also by charging a fee it means that not everyone will want to use it so it won't get too busy.

Its not crazy at all. Whats crazy is you thinking everything is crazy. Its not Bori's idea I'm sure. It will have been a group of folk at TfL that will have probably suggested it,

Its also only a study to see if it is feasible to do that. So its got every chance that it may never happen.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

If the population of London continues to grow as it has, this will be the tip of a very large and expensive iceberg. Anyone who uses the M25, Dartford Crossing, Blackwall Tunnel etc. etc. will know just how close to capacity they are. How much will it cost to deal with those? It's all very well telling us that they're building new infrastructure etc. but who's confronting the reality that more people cannot continue being squeezed into London without radical changes to the way of life of its residents? Does anyone have a long term plan for the population of London or are we just going to wake up one day and find things have ground to a halt?

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

It is right that all options are looked at.

Ken

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

Forgive me though, which Party's mayor of London was responsible for the congestion charge?

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

Must we bring party politics into everything? No-one is planning on removing the congestion charge any time soon so that's a non-issue.

Give it a bit longer and all major roads will end up underground in London as land will cost so much selling it will cover some of the construction costs.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

It's a 50 year old structure that is *extremely* heavily used. Even with the best maintenance in the world, it's not going to last for years, and is going to become increasingly expensive to maintain.

Regarding a replacement, a tunnel may or may not be the best option. The pros are that it frees up a *lot* of space currently occupied by the flyover and other roads that could be used for other things, and will not cause the same widespread disruption that patching or rebuilding the flyover will. The cons are the cost (it will cost potentially billions) and that it will cause disruption.

However, in the long term, patching the current flyover will cause a lot more disruption and will cost more to maintain.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

We all know that whatever is done and however it's funded Arthur will whine about it. Unhappy is as unhappy does after all...

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

What a waste of money. Build a less expensive cycleway instead and divert car drivers onto public transport. Sustainable and sensible.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

whats the point you wont use it

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

That's true because I don't live anywhere near that steaming, fleapit den of iniquity you call a Capital City :D

Which reminds me, London isn't the only place that £bns of taxpayers cash should be spent.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

Nothing wrong with tolls used to finance specific projects, as long as when the project is paid for the toll is removed or reduced to maintain only.

I use the M6 toll regularly.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

I agree and that was the 'plan' with the Dartford Crossing IIRC. Of course it didn't work out like that and it's been a cash cow for years.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

I am only whinging, as its always US that end up paying for it.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

Well, at least you live there Arthur. Think about all the taxpayers in the rest of the Country who will never use it but also fund it.

You should be more concerned about mansion tax anyway :).

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

Do u think many people would suddenly decide to use public transport? And what about the disabled or sick that need their cars?

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

If the compulsory option was public transport or walk (or cycle), they would soon get used to using public transport. Besides, gridlock will remove the option soon, there's no point delaying the inevitable at such exorbitant cost.

Qualifying road users such as the emergency services, police, some disabled could be allowed into the City Centre.

Think how much better the environment would be.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

It's something I'd like to see, but I doubt it's a viable option without someone spending a *lot* more upgrading the public transport networks to cope with the extra demand. These upgrades would also like take many decades. To give an idea of the time scale. I live near a relatively small, but busy national rail train line. One which has been earmarked by National Rail, TFL and the Mayor as being a line they want converted to the underground to reduce the strain on Lewisham station (which is a massive choke point for the South Eastern rail network). Even though the project to convert this line to an extension of the Bakerloo line has the support of all those authorities, we've been told it's unlikely to be completed before 2040.

This is apparently considered to be a cheap way to increase capacity, only costing £3bn.

Re: Hammersmith Flyover Replacement Tunnel
 

The bullet has to be bitten. A super highway will not be cheap either and it will become clogged up just like every other road 'improvement' does.

Our young people already have some pretty crummy legacies from this generation; this is something we could get right for them.

It's radical change but imho it is unavoidable. Otherwise we'll have paved the UK and put up a parking lot (apologies to Joni Mitchell :))

London, or a substantial part of it, could be a beautiful City without all that traffic. The Underground artery is there - all it needs is developing. Political clout is needed to speed it up.