The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)
Comments
-
While I don't think they are quite the same thing, I can see some crossover between NIMBY resistance to building and support for road restrictions. That's something to be aware of, especially the kind of hysterical objections you see that such and such development will inevitably lead to gridlock, accidents and deaths.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Is it similar to the crafty way of not getting done for speeding?
1 -
Well here's the problem Brian - given the amount of fines, clearly a lot of traffic is coming into these LTNs which would indicate that something isn't working. As 'any speed limit no matter how slow' brigade often claim, they don't want people to be fined...somehow I'm not sure about that.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Can't remember if this study has been shared:
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213624X23001785
"Mean falls in motor traffic on internal roads are around ten times greater than mean rises in motor traffic on boundary roads, adjusting for background trends. We believe that this result suggests that these LTN schemes may be contributing to ‘traffic evaporation’ or ‘disappearing traffic’ (Cairns et al., 2002). Traffic evaporation refers to the many ways in which people adjust habitual behaviour in response to restrictions, which may lead to a reduction in motor traffic. This may simply mean a car trip to a specific destination is directly replaced by a walking or cycling trip. Probably more common, however, are more complex changes: for instance, a person makes fewer trips to the supermarket (by car) and more shopping trips on foot to the local shops, or combining car trip destinations to increase efficiency.8 We cannot say which of these types of behavioural response is dominant in the schemes studied here.
"Specifically, this study found substantial reductions in motor traffic within scheme areas, while across boundary roads there was very little aggregate change (+0.7% mean average compared to background trends). We have not attempted to calculate overall traffic reduction due to these schemes, because aggregation is affected by the number of count points, and in most cases, more counters could have hypothetically been placed (particularly on internal roads, more numerous than boundary roads). However, the results indicate that motor traffic has been reduced, and only a small proportion re-routed to boundary roads. This is suggested by the mean increase of 82 vehicles per day on each boundary road being much lower than the mean reduction of 815 vehicles on each internal road."
0 -
The problem here is that it isn't working as I mentioned above. The level of fines (from memory £130) are such that nobody bar maybe the odd billionaire will knowingly to drive into one and not care about the cost. So given the number of fines dished out it is self evident that the signage and notifications for these zones are inadequate. Whether that is through incompetence or deliberately is open to debate.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Brian, RJS, RC and KG all seem to be anti car based on there posts here (ironically despite most of them driving one). They clearly don't like my pro car position as you can see.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
See my post above about inadequate warnings. The more cynical amongst us could be forgiven for thinking that its a money making ploy.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Brian, what if the speed limit was dropped to (say) 5mph everywhere? Would you still take the line that everyone should just fall into line and obey?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Maybe it just means drivers have to adjust to LTNs & fines being a 'thing'. When I drove to Bath, I knew there was something Ulezzy there, so did some homework first. If I were driving anywhere in London, I'd certainly be checking very carefully. Being ignorant or keeping fingers crossed probably isn't the cheapest option.
0 -
Inadequate signage is a well documented objection to these things on line. It's all very well saying people should pay attention but the authorities have a clear duty to make their signage clear. And it appears they are failing, but somehow its all our fault?
TFL is currently being taken to court by a Dutch hauliers over inadequate signage of ULEZ - same principle. They're from the EU so they must be right...
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
A single data point, but my mother in law no longer drives into Bristol congestion charge area. Granted others will just pay and grumble, but it does seem to have some effect.
Here's the analysis on another LTN in Tulse Hill.
This one seems to have been more successful with traffic reduced following implementation. As noted before there are bound to be good and bad examples. I don't think you can generalise from one collected statistic.
I think there was a figure of £56m claimed. A bit of research says that about 675,000 penalties were issued in 2023. Share that over the 103 permanent LTNs and that's about 17 vehicles per LTN per day. I don't think 17 vehicles counts as an LTN not working.
29 of those 103 LTNs are in Islington, so despite the Telegraph's spin, they cover a pretty miniscule part of the country.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
My point about inadequate signage stands. Or if they really want to make sure it is a deterrence, do something with physical barriers like the sort of pay booths you get on the Severn bridge. Locals can have a free electronic pass.
Also I wonder why there are so many in the territories of leftie London councils? Surely it's coincidence....
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I've not done an exhaustive survey and I would guess neither have you. The numbers don't suggest many people are accidentally driving into them as not many people are driving through them in the first place. Which is kind of the point. Ignore the figures if you want, but generally they are working, with some exceptions as you noted.
If the Conservatives have abandoned urban and suburban areas one can hardly blame Labour for capitalising on that.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I'm also pretty vigilant but the amount of signage especially in London makes it very difficult for the average drive to pick up everything while also trying to drive safely and keep their eyes on the road. The number of fines shows that is case. I almost got caught by one in Dulwich Village as the sign was a foot 7 feet up on a pole in not massive lettering and I had to pretty much come to a stop to check it, which is a safety issue in itself.
I did some reading on it afterwards and lots of locals from just outside the LTN had been caught out multiple times before the slew of fines dropped onto their doormat.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm pro people making informed choices about what are the best transport options, not sticking their collective heads in the sand. That happens to be anti car, in most cases. But that would make driving more pleasant for when it's the only choice, and vey much more pleasant for those who suffer the effects of having too many, too fast cars in places that aren't suitable for them.
At one time anti-smokers were looked on as infringing on smokers' liberties, but it's turned around that smoking in public enclosed spaces is an infringement of a more important liberty.
Since WW2 we've prioritised private motor transport at the expense of all other forms of transport (apart from air) for a number of reasons, and now we discover how reluctant drivers are to even consider other modes of transport, even when encouraged with carrot & stick, and despite ever-increasing gridlock, which will never be resolved unless habits change. If habitual drivers won't take a hint, then the sticks will just get bigger.
0 -
As I said, if I drove anywhere in London, I'd do my homework first. Maybe there's a tech/app solution to it - given the level of fines, surely someone can monetise the avoidance of them.
I did a speed awareness course, having got caught on a short stretch of road leading into Truro on which thousands of others have been caught. I suspect the signage isn't great, given the numbers, but it's not making me question the justification of speed limits.
0 -
-
Seriously, if there are only a hundred of these in existence across the whole of the UK, and a third of those are in one central London borough, they cannot possibly be that big an issue. You can't possibly be driving around Dulwich Village for the motoring experience. It seems like you are trying quite hard to get upset by these.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
See my earlier point about easyJet being 'anti-flying' because they charge more for some flights than others.
It's not anti-car to think that motorists should have some limits on where and when they can drive. There are limits on all sorts of non-essential activities.
I don't see any opinion pieces about private roads with restricted access, of which there are hundreds
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The less cynical (Who? me? 🤔) would blame self entitled negligent drivers.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
When I went to collect my son from Oxford at Christmas, I ended up in one of their LTNs. I had beed directed into it by the sat nav. Signage was negligible and certainly not something you would spot unless specifically looking hard for it. Fortunately no fines though.
I think in princilple they are a good idea if implemented correctly, but not sure they require fines if the through road element is blocked. I'm also sure that they could have droppable bollards that the emergency services could control remotely.
1 -
https://twitter.com/LiveableWells/status/1766519651893194999
0 -
Trying to work out whether you think 7ft is too high to too low?
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
7 feet is actually the standard mounting height for a sign so they were spot on. I agree there is way too much sign clutter though.
0 -
You don't get fined if there's physical barriers.
Anti LTN campaigners always want it to be enforced by cameras, so that emergency services can get through (fair enough), then people a) still drive through, meaning the benefits aren't as high, and b) complain about getting fined, both of which are used as a stick to beat the LTN.
There's plenty of LTNs that have been in since the 70s which are not controversial at all. Pretty much every new development is basically an LTN because it's where people like to live.
0 -
This is another key point - sign clutter. There are so many of the things especially in towns and cities that many drivers struggle to take them all in, even with the best will in the world.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Your first sentence is very relevant. Councils want to make money, hence no physical barriers.
As mentioned, the technology is there to let authorised vehicles through, as you can see on some toll roads.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
No problem with not reading signs correctly if you block it with a bollard.
0 -
lol country folk can’t handle a few signs?
Honestly, sort yourself with a good sat nav if you find the signs too tricky, though I’d suggest if you can’t read signs, you probably shouldn’t be driving.
0
