The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)
Comments
-
The solution is fewer cars. It's always the solution.
0 -
Would have thought it is stating the bleeding obvious that such a scheme is entirely dependent on local context and the skill with which particular routes are selected for closure. Thing works if done well; doesn't work if poorly thought through.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I know you don't live in London, but you must be familiar with the fact that busy roads are pretty much a constant throughout Zones 1-3. Streatham Wells is bordered by the A23. It's never quiet.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
I know that area as my cousin used to live around there. I can't see a case for making worse though.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Wonder what would happen if they just made everywhere a LTN.
If you don't want traffic going past your door, move out of town. I've put my money where my mouth is rather than go for what is just traffic nimbyism.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You get very nice town centres. Cambridge city centre has been an “LTN” for as long as I have been around.
0 -
I'm sure that the outcomes will be different in each case, but as mentioned above it's just traffic nimbyism. Given that, how do you square your support of LTNs with your views on to housebuilding and property nimbyism?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'll counter that with Sevenoaks which manages to be both very nice and pretty car friendly. Was up there earlier today - drove in, parked for free less than a 5 min walk from the shops etc.
Cambridge is proably bit of a special case as a lot of the land in town is taken up with colleges.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You wonder why everyone cycles - you have to go around town to drive. Can cycle straight through on a bike. Faster, cheaper etc
Fewer cars to contend with etc
0 -
Like I said, its a special case given that a lot of the in town is taken up with colleges. So hardly your average town.
The number of people cycling is probably driven by the number of students - who generally can't afford cars.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
In what way?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
It’s such a pain to go by car, the only people who drive are the elderly and those driving into town from far away.
Takes me 12 minutes to cycle to my parents. Takes around 30-45 depending on traffic to drive.
0 -
Not sure how you could. Assume people were rat running across and down to the Common and the LTN pushed this back onto the High Road.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
They’re mainly residential streets. They aren’t intended for heavy traffic. The problem is that the roads that should be used as a thoroughfare are clogged up so people cut through streets that aren’t suitable. If everyone who could reasonably make their journey on foot, bike or public transport chose to do so it would mean the proper roads would have capacity for those whose journey is only viable by car.
0 -
You're making assumptions about the heaviness of traffic there. Amd that's a bit if which simply isn't the reality.
Some of the issues raised have been around things like ambulances and fire engines taking longer to arrive (especially where there are physical barriers) and women's safety in cases where taxis can't or won't go all the way to drop them off. Pretty important points really.
Like I said above, get out of town if you can't stand traffic.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Fair enough, but my point above still stands about Cambridge not being your average town.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So effectively this about whose street or road the traffic goes on. Someone gets the short end of the stick though.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
There are hierarchies of roads with different purposes. Residential streets are designed for local traffic accessing the houses. It’s harder for emergency services to get down a residential street that is clogged up with rat running vehicles. They’d also find it a lot quicker getting places if those who could reasonably make the journey a different way did so. As TBB points out the issue is that there is too much traffic not that traffic is being prevented from using streets not intended for heavy traffic.
0 -
In which case what's with the planters and bollards? Doesn't matter that you get shot of rat run cars, ambulances and fire engines will still have to take adetour if they come across a physical barrier, potentially with fatal consequences.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm still interested to understand how you take a completely different view of traffic nimbys compared to housing nimbys.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Emergency services are a statutory consultee on these things. If they believe a particular scheme is going to be a problem they can object and generally the highway authority will take account of their views. Not every scheme gets it right and it is sensible then to reevaluate (as seems to have been the case in the instance reported).
Objectors to all sorts of things cite “safety concerns” (I had one scheme where a few extra houses were being built off an existing steep road serving a 1960s housing estate and one objector produced a mock coroner’s report for a child that will be killed as a result of all this extra traffic using the road - it had no recorded injury accidents in the previous 50 odd years!).
0 -
I've not read the article, but as far as I can tell, there is opposition to every LTN on that basis. Just the same as the allegation that bus lanes and protected cycle lanes cause delays.
0 -
-
Would these be people who live in the proposed LTNs, as opposed to those nearby? See my point above.
Anyhow, let's see your source for that claim.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You seem very sure it couldn't happen, not clear how.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
And so they should. Where possible, residential streets should be safe and access only for traffic. The solution to congestion elsewhere is not tonuse residential streets as transport conduits.
0 -
I already live a LTN: it's called a village. Like I said above, if you don't like traffic, move out of town. Pretty sure you get that, FA.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So the people who live there should move out so the people that don’t can drive their cars through the area unimpeded? Yes, that sounds reasonable.
0
