Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

My family didn't have a car and we just hired one when we needed one. Then we had children (plural) and that was a complete game changer. Hiring a car is possible but it's inconvenient, having to fit in car seats and there is a possible safety/breakdown issue as some people use and abuse rentals.

The more rubbish we make life for car owners, the more we end up punishing those with limited mobility who rely on them. Obviously makes life difficult for small traders as well.

I would be interested in seeing stats on the percentage of traffic in Lambeth that is through traffic vs residents anyway.

Punishing residents does nothing to help the bigger problem of through traffic that clogs all the main roads.

As soon as you reduce traffic by residents it gets replaced by people driving in/out of London as their sat navs route them through the streets with the least traffic on. :)
 
Cat Fan said:
My family didn't have a car and we just hired one when we needed one. Then we had children (plural) and that was a complete game changer. Hiring a car is possible but it's inconvenient, having to fit in car seats and there is a possible safety/breakdown issue as some people use and abuse rentals.

The more rubbish we make life for car owners, the more we end up punishing those with limited mobility who rely on them. Obviously makes life difficult for small traders as well.

I would be interested in seeing stats on the percentage of traffic in Lambeth that is through traffic vs residents anyway.

Punishing residents does nothing to help the bigger problem of through traffic that clogs all the main roads.

As soon as you reduce traffic by residents it gets replaced by people driving in/out of London as their sat navs route them through the streets with the least traffic on. :)
Click to expand...

This just depends on how we make it rubbish for car owners.

For instance, if we make car ownership very expensive, then people with limited mobility can continue to access vehicles through the motability scheme and be unaffected by extra charges for car ownership, and/or can have additional payments through benefit systems to cover extra costs of car usage (and yes, I know, currently we won't see anything done to help disabled people on the benefits side of the equation and there are many people who have been wrongly excluded from getting DLA/PIP but then we're also not going to see car ownership made very expensive either).

Or when we are talking about something like LTNs or other general, non-financial based, traffic reduction measures, then if they work, those who are left needing to drive have fewer other drivers around clogging up roads and journeys become easier. school holidays see a reduction in traffic of around 10-15%, it's not a huge number but when you look at the effect it has on congestion it's massive. If you can get those people who don't need to drive out of their cars, it makes it much better for those who do need to drive.
Or like if we're talking about removing kerbside parking, then you leave spaces for blue badge holders (I think that is part of what has been proposed by Lambeth council in their kerbside strategy). You exempt blue badge holders from the need to have a specific parking space and things like that.

I have no idea what the ratio is but I would be willing to place a very large bet that the number of people without mobility issues that could use another form of transport but currently choose to drive vastly outweighs the number of people with mobility or other issues which mean driving is the only reasonable option for them.

On your last sentence, if you are blocking those streets with LTN implementations, then satnavs can't re-route through traffic down those roads :)
 
BigTom said:
This just depends on how we make it rubbish for car owners.

For instance, if we make car ownership very expensive, then people with limited mobility can continue to access vehicles through the motability scheme and be unaffected by extra charges for car ownership, and/or can have additional payments through benefit systems to cover extra costs of car usage (and yes, I know, currently we won't see anything done to help disabled people on the benefits side of the equation and there are many people who have been wrongly excluded from getting DLA/PIP but then we're also not going to see car ownership made very expensive either).

Or when we are talking about something like LTNs or other general, non-financial based, traffic reduction measures, then if they work, those who are left needing to drive have fewer other drivers around clogging up roads and journeys become easier. school holidays see a reduction in traffic of around 10-15%, it's not a huge number but when you look at the effect it has on congestion it's massive. If you can get those people who don't need to drive out of their cars, it makes it much better for those who do need to drive.
Or like if we're talking about removing kerbside parking, then you leave spaces for blue badge holders (I think that is part of what has been proposed by Lambeth council in their kerbside strategy). You exempt blue badge holders from the need to have a specific parking space and things like that.

I have no idea what the ratio is but I would be willing to place a very large bet that the number of people without mobility issues that could use another form of transport but currently choose to drive vastly outweighs the number of people with mobility or other issues which mean driving is the only reasonable option for them.

On your last sentence, if you are blocking those streets with LTN implementations, then satnavs can't re-route through traffic down those roads :)
Click to expand...
It’s not the whole answer but this report is what you’re getting at.
In total, 4.3 million trips per average day have been identified as potentially cyclable, equivalent to 23 per cent of trips by all modes and 35 per cent of trips by mechanised modes. Analysis of the characteristics of these trips shows that:
Nearly two thirds of potentially cyclable trips are currently made by car with the remainder largely made by bus;
Four in ten potentially cyclable trips are made for shopping and leisure purposes and just under a quarter for work purposes; and
Of the 4.3 million potentially cyclable trips made every day, 3.5 million would take less than 20 minutes for most people to cycle.
 
Cat Fan said:
My family didn't have a car and we just hired one when we needed one. Then we had children (plural) and that was a complete game changer. Hiring a car is possible but it's inconvenient, having to fit in car seats and there is a possible safety/breakdown issue as some people use and abuse rentals.

:)
Click to expand...
What about people who have children but can't afford a car or are unable to drive? How do you think their convenience of everyday life is affected by decisions that make things more convenient for car owners?
 
Cat Fan said:
My family didn't have a car and we just hired one when we needed one. Then we had children (plural) and that was a complete game changer. Hiring a car is possible but it's inconvenient, having to fit in car seats and there is a possible safety/breakdown issue as some people use and abuse rentals.

The more rubbish we make life for car owners, the more we end up punishing those with limited mobility who rely on them. Obviously makes life difficult for small traders as well.

I would be interested in seeing stats on the percentage of traffic in Lambeth that is through traffic vs residents anyway.

Punishing residents does nothing to help the bigger problem of through traffic that clogs all the main roads.

As soon as you reduce traffic by residents it gets replaced by people driving in/out of London as their sat navs route them through the streets with the least traffic on. :)
Click to expand...
We don’t own a car now and didn’t before having kids but did when we had young kids.

You are right that it makes life much easier and that owning is easier than renting. The provision of hire/club cars which can safely convey young children is appalling.

It seems to me that this is actually something that could be fixed with government invention - the technology isn’t difficult - it just takes some regulation.

However, there’s a bit of a logical leap in your post from “my life was made easier owning a car when I had kids” (yes, mine too) to:
punishing those with limited mobility
Click to expand...
It is possible to have children and move them about London without owning a car. Lots of people do it. And those of us that choose to do it by car have to take the rough with the smooth if London is to keep moving and not be polluted.
 
We raised two kids in London without a car. In fairness I did have a motorbike which I used to commute and to take them to footie, etc. At no point did I feel the need for a car. Most of my friends had cars, and they were always late to things. On the odd occasion I needed to move kit that woudlnt fit on the motorbike, I would rent a zipvan.

The kids have grown and moved out and now we do have a car, which we use to visit them in far-flung parts of the UK.

I dont get why people think getting around london in a car is a convenience. Its an expensive, annoying nightmare that sucks up your time.

Our streets should be for people, trades, and those who cannot move around without cars.
 
BigTom said:
Or when we are talking about something like LTNs or other general, non-financial based, traffic reduction measures, then if they work, those who are left needing to drive have fewer other drivers around clogging up roads and journeys become easier. school holidays see a reduction in traffic of around 10-15%, it's not a huge number but when you look at the effect it has on congestion it's massive. If you can get those people who don't need to drive out of their cars, it makes it much better for those who do need to drive.
Or like if we're talking about removing kerbside parking, then you leave spaces for blue badge holders (I think that is part of what has been proposed by Lambeth council in their kerbside strategy). You exempt blue badge holders from the need to have a specific parking space and things like that.

I have no idea what the ratio is but I would be willing to place a very large bet that the number of people without mobility issues that could use another form of transport but currently choose to drive vastly outweighs the number of people with mobility or other issues which mean driving is the only reasonable option for them.

On your last sentence, if you are blocking those streets with LTN implementations, then satnavs can't re-route through traffic down those roads :)
Click to expand...
This is just the exact opposite of what's happening in Haringey at the moment - main roads clogged up - new rat runs generated via satnavs/waze in residential roads outside the LTNs. Reason - cause Haringey has low car ownership and shed loads of through traffic.

Currently the 3 LTNs are abit like chucking 3 pebbles into a stream.. and is just displacing traffic. The solution seems to be to either implement them across the whole borough or have a rather pointless scheme that just makes some areas nicer to live in and others less so.
 
editor said:
Much as I support this policy, it'll probably drive more car owners to completely pave over their gardens and turn streets even uglier.
Click to expand...
But Lambeth hold the trump card.... They have to give you permission to create a driveway if you need to cross the public footpath. 💪
 
editor said:
I wonder how many households have ever been refused. It's utterly depressing seeing London's front gardens turned into car parks rammed full of vehicles.
Click to expand...
Many will be historical. I'm pretty certain they are very strict now and it costs thousands to get the dropped curb. So fingers crossed
 
Torpid Scorpion said:
We raised two kids in London without a car. In fairness I did have a motorbike which I used to commute and to take them to footie, etc. At no point did I feel the need for a car. Most of my friends had cars, and they were always late to things. On the odd occasion I needed to move kit that woudlnt fit on the motorbike, I would rent a zipvan.
Click to expand...
Sorry should have said motorised vehicle then, not car, lol
 
teuchter said:
What about people who have children but can't afford a car or are unable to drive? How do you think their convenience of everyday life is affected by decisions that make things more convenient for car owners?
Click to expand...
Public transport provision in London is pretty good thankfully, and kids travel free. It's more for journeys outside of London where a private car really comes in useful. Getting two small kids from A to B on buses is doable but hard, and if the pushchair space is taken when the bus rolls up then you have to wait for the next one. If it helps I drive a battery electric vehicle and I respect the speed limit, so at least from an air quality perspective it's better for those around me

I would never do school drop off with a car and I don't commute by car, so you could say I'm an off peak driver.

I would be very tempted to get rid of the car once the kids are older and don't need so much ferrying around.

I know a lot of middle aged men and women who are mad into cycling, but London is never going to be Amsterdam, sorry. Far too many hills for a start, and ebikes are too expensive for most people.

That said I'd love to see more segregated cycle lanes, because more people and particularly more families and young people would be encouraged to cycle if it was less dangerous

I hope we will see a gradual shift over the next 50 years. Maybe better safety features in cars (AI) can improve road safety for everyone. Maybe people will all be on electric scooters
 
Cat Fan said:
Public transport provision in London is pretty good thankfully, and kids travel free. It's more for journeys outside of London where a private car really comes in useful. Getting two small kids from A to B on buses is doable but hard, and if the pushchair space is taken when the bus rolls up then you have to wait for the next one. If it helps I drive a battery electric vehicle and I respect the speed limit, so at least from an air quality perspective it's better for those around me

I would never do school drop off with a car and I don't commute by car, so you could say I'm an off peak driver.

I would be very tempted to get rid of the car once the kids are older and don't need so much ferrying around.

I know a lot of middle aged men and women who are mad into cycling, but London is never going to be Amsterdam, sorry. Far too many hills for a start, and ebikes are too expensive for most people.

That said I'd love to see more segregated cycle lanes, because more people and particularly more families and young people would be encouraged to cycle if it was less dangerous

I hope we will see a gradual shift over the next 50 years. Maybe better safety features in cars (AI) can improve road safety for everyone. Maybe people will all be on electric scooters
Click to expand...
Ok, but none of this answers the question I asked. What you've written is all about what is or isn't convenient for you, and your justifications for your car use.
 
editor said:
I wonder how many households have ever been refused. It's utterly depressing seeing London's front gardens turned into car parks rammed full of vehicles.
Click to expand...
I suspect most that do it haven’t asked for permission and the council doesn’t enforce due to lack of resources.
 
Hollis said:
This is just the exact opposite of what's happening in Haringey at the moment - main roads clogged up - new rat runs generated via satnavs/waze in residential roads outside the LTNs. Reason - cause Haringey has low car ownership and shed loads of through traffic.

Currently the 3 LTNs are abit like chucking 3 pebbles into a stream.. and is just displacing traffic. The solution seems to be to either implement them across the whole borough or have a rather pointless scheme that just makes some areas nicer to live in and others less so.
Click to expand...

Ah, sure i see what you/they mean and what i think should be done is that you start in the place(s) with the worst issues, and reduce traffic there then move on to places where displacement has created new/more issues - as you say it needs to be borough wide. Block one rat run, creating another then block that until none are left, just roads suitable for all the through traffic (if such roads exist without being purpose built).

But through traffic should also reduce as you make it less convenient to drive through and people change mode of transport for their journey because cycling or public transport becomes relatively more attractive.

As long as with each step you are reducing traffic overall, you are making a positive difference to reduce traffic and thereby pollution, much of which is particulate pollution from tires and brakes and not addressed by emissions standards/EVs. You start somewhere and then move on to the next place that needs it most afterwards.
 
BigTom said:
Ah, sure i see what you/they mean and what i think should be done is that you start in the place(s) with the worst issues, and reduce traffic there then move on to places where displacement has created new/more issues - as you say it needs to be borough wide. Block one rat run, creating another then block that until none are left, just roads suitable for all the through traffic (if such roads exist without being purpose built).

But through traffic should also reduce as you make it less convenient to drive through and people change mode of transport for their journey because cycling or public transport becomes relatively more attractive.

As long as with each step you are reducing traffic overall, you are making a positive difference to reduce traffic and thereby pollution, much of which is particulate pollution from tires and brakes and not addressed by emissions standards/EVs. You start somewhere and then move on to the next place that needs it most afterwards.
Click to expand...
Problem is that the council can only put restrictions on the roads that they manage, and a lot of the bigger roads which handle the most traffic are managed by TFL.
 
teuchter said:
Ok, but none of this answers the question I asked. What you've written is all about what is or isn't convenient for you, and your justifications for your car use.
Click to expand...
What about people who have children but can't afford a car or are unable to drive?
As I said, public transport is imperfect but it's available.
How do you think their convenience of everyday life is affected by decisions that make things more convenient for car owners?
There is a balance to be struck. For the most part I think LTNs are a step in the right direction, but I think a more joined up solution working with TFL is required so all the traffic doesn't get diverted onto boundary roads.

As someone who lives in a LTN I haven't seen any reduction in car ownership/use by residents since the LTN came in. If anything the opposite.
 
Cat Fan said:
What about people who have children but can't afford a car or are unable to drive?
As I said, public transport is imperfect but it's available.
How do you think their convenience of everyday life is affected by decisions that make things more convenient for car owners?
There is a balance to be struck. For the most part I think LTNs are a step in the right direction, but I think a more joined up solution working with TFL is required so all the traffic doesn't get diverted onto boundary roads.

As someone who lives in a LTN I haven't seen any reduction in car ownership/use by residents since the LTN came in. If anything the opposite.
Click to expand...
Your original statement was about how hiring cars is inconvenient for people who have children and who want to use a car. I don't dispute that having your own car will be more convenient for many people, compared to hiring. And there are probably things that could be done to make use of hire cars more convenient. But my point was that you are viewing these questions of convenience from the position of someone who has the option of having their own car, and I was asking you to think about what things look like to people with kids who don't have a car. We were discussing the pavement policy. In broad terms, improving pavement space, reducing the amount of traffic in general, reducing the number of parked cars, increasing the availability of car club cars, these are all things that can make daily life more convenient for those who don't own a car.

In other words, I don't think we should be losing too much sleep about the idea that some changes in policy might make things less convenient for car owning parents, because I think they are already in a much better position than those parents who have to make do without their own car.

Your responses above are just standard issue LTN waffle - "there is a balance to be struck" "a step in the right direction but". The whole point is where the balance should be struck, and it needs to be struck in a place that will make certain things less convenient than what the status quo provides for car owners.

You acknowledge that getting small kids from A to B by bus is "doable but hard" but you then use this point to justify your own use of a car, rather than thinking about how things can be made better for those that have to get small kids from A to B without a car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Cyclist killed in Brixton
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
T & P
T & P
blameless77
After work pint in Brixton?
Replies
12
Views
799
editor
editor
editor
It's a grim Christmas around Brixton: no lights, no tree and no funfair
Replies
1
Views
743
skyscraper101
skyscraper101
editor
Coronation (and anti Coronation events this weekend in and around Brixton
Replies
5
Views
803
Gramsci
Gramsci
editor
Homophobia in Brixton
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
Tulster218
T
Back
Top Bottom