liquidindian
Hello
That doesn't happen.all the traffic doesn't get diverted onto boundary roads.
That doesn't happen.all the traffic doesn't get diverted onto boundary roads.
I was more trying to explain why many families with small kids may see running a car as essential or borderline essential.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.
Well, good luck to anyone who hopes to extract any coherent points from all that.
In terms of ownership its a lot to expect that people immediately sell their car when an LTN is implemented - it's either a sunk cost (ie paid for) or a lease or loan that has some time to run. I'd guess the point at which people might decide not to own a car any longer is when they one they have needs replacing. (that's whats' happened with all the people I've known who've owned a car and then not). Thats going to be a pretty gradual change. I'd guess it also affects where people choose to live - if your car is a massive status symbol and part of your identity you'd logically think about moving to a different area in the same way that new car free developments are going to, by definition, to only attract non-car owners.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.
I think this is the “I agree with the aims of the scheme but it’s unfair because the minority of better off people with cars are negatively impacted. If you could do it without impacting me I’d be fully in favour” technique
If you think LTNs penalise drivers then surely they also have most impact on those who drive frequently.I prefer the mayor's approach of congestion charge/ULEZ which punishes the most frequent drivers a
Here's the "action against unfair ULEZ" page if anyone is interested in reading about the various SUVs and trucks that mayor Khan is forcing londoners to sell to people in the provinces.
Action Against Unfair ULEZ CAZ, LTN, PPM & 20mph Nonsense | Facebook
We need to act NOW. This is rapidly going national. We need ideas, proposals and people who can actually do something. Please add people like crazy because we need to be quick. Share the hell out...www.facebook.com
I am pro LTN but I do think there's a limit to what they can achieve on their own, so we need more restrictions, ideally ones that apply equally to non residents like a stricter ULEZ or road pricing.I think this is the “I agree with the aims of the scheme but it’s unfair because the minority of better off people with cars are negatively impacted. If you could do it without impacting me I’d be fully in favour” technique
Yeah, that's spot on to be fair.If you think LTNs penalise drivers then surely they also have most impact on those who drive frequently.
For people in an LTN it's likely that some trips by car will be a bit longer (not all - because presumably in some directions they'll still be exiting the area in the direction they're travelling in, and even for some trips further away that are altered driving around the edge of the LTN won't be the most direct route).
If you only drive once or twice a week that's no great shakes really.
It's only really a big deal if you're driving a short trips frequently. Like 'the school run', or driving your dog to shit in the park twice a day, or the people I see driving and coming back with one bag of shopping from the supermarket. Or who seem to have driven to buy a takeaway coffee.
Yes, I do see a lot of 21/22 reg cars on the street and the LTN was put in place during lockdown. But I have no idea if there would have been more or less it the LTN hadn't gone in.In terms of ownership its a lot to expect that people immediately sell their car when an LTN is implemented - it's either a sunk cost (ie paid for) or a lease or loan that has some time to run. I'd guess the point at which people might decide not to own a car any longer is when they one they have needs replacing. (that's whats' happened with all the people I've known who've owned a car and then not). Thats going to be a pretty gradual change. I'd guess it also affects where people choose to live - if your car is a massive status symbol and part of your identity you'd logically think about moving to a different area in the same way that new car free developments are going to, by definition, to only attract non-car owners.
In terms of use your anecdata doesn't seem to chime with the normal anti-LTN line that people are trapped in their homes, unable to travel, lives being made more difficult, having to drive the long way round. I don't think either usage or ownership is something that any of us can measure to any useful degree based on casual observation. I do think that the LTNs have a made a lot of people pay more attention to traffic whereas they'd just accepted it before - so many claims of huge (observed) increases that are completely contradicted by traffic counts and of choking on unbreathable air whereas all of the data shows that London's air has been getting cleaner year on year for some time (due to ever tighter emission standards on vehicles, accelerated by the ULEZ).
Don’t forget driving to the gym.
The whole point of the LTN is that local drivers are sufficiently inconvenienced they don’t drive and that not local drivers follow major routes rather than rat run.
Alex
In terms of use your anecdata doesn't seem to chime with the normal anti-LTN line that people are trapped in their homes, unable to travel, lives being made more difficult, having to drive the long way round. I don't think either usage or ownership is something that any of us can measure to any useful degree based on casual observation. I do think that the LTNs have a made a lot of people pay more attention to traffic whereas they'd just accepted it before - so many claims of huge (observed) increases that are completely contradicted by traffic counts and of choking on unbreathable air whereas all of the data shows that London's air has been getting cleaner year on year for some time (due to ever tighter emission standards on vehicles, accelerated by the ULEZ).
Don't be surprised that councils spin the data to get the outcome they want.I have some questions with the studies and data being collected. The data seems to focus on the LTNs and boundary roads - which for example in some studies is defined as within 500m. Again, in Haringey, we're seeing displaced traffic much beyond 500m..
The evaluation study which is being planned isn't going to capture this - as it's selected control areas far removed from the boundary areas and LTNs - because there's an expectation that there will be traffic displacement (Haringey Council's own evaluation plan..). Surely regardless of where you sit in relation to LTNs data beyond 500m should be included within the evalutation.
University of Westminster to lead major £1.5m new study on Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in London
I am pro LTN but I do think there's a limit to what they can achieve on their own, so we need more restrictions, ideally ones that apply equally to non residents like a stricter ULEZ or road pricing.
So it's unrealistic to extend blanket policies penalising car ownership into the south of the borough otherwise it's probably going to disproportionately impact families with children, while retired households and younger adult households (e.g. students) are less likely to be impacted.
I'm worried that forcing LTNs onto the suburbs (where people genuinely rely on cars) will backfire and then all LTNs will be tarred with the same brush.So what policies in particular are you worried about?
Not sure you can call Streatham Wells the suburbs. Also, car ownership there is still only about 50% and the highest areas are like 70% so lots of people are managing without.I'm worried that forcing LTNs onto the suburbs (where people genuinely rely on cars) will backfire and then all LTNs will be tarred with the same brush.
I'm also worried about them being badly implemented and leading to problems that way.
And a little bit worried about the A23, S Circular and Leigham court road being completely gridlocked once Streatham Vale and Brixton hill LTNs are finished, to the extent that no one will be able to get anywhere.
But hopefully it means less car journeys in the long run
I live within sight of it and can’t say I’ve seen this. Have seen improvements at Roupell Rd no there isn’t traffic turning in & out of there or going across.I believe the south circular (moving west from Tulse Hill to the A23) is a lot worse now
Correlation is not causation, although I suspect there is a relationship here.
But I have no problem with that, as the Sth Circular is meant to be a main arterial, whereas the side streets aren't
The Streatham Hill LTN wasn't in place (signage removed and not enforced) from the start of June to the start of December last year and I didn't notice any comments about traffic on the South Circular there improving, nor any about it getting worse when it was reinstated.I believe the south circular (moving west from Tulse Hill to the A23) is a lot worse now
Correlation is not causation, although I suspect there is a relationship here.
But I have no problem with that, as the Sth Circular is meant to be a main arterial, whereas the side streets aren't
Streatham Wells even has a local bus! But it was identified by Lambeth as the ward having the second worst negative impacts by traffic in the whole borough. I imagine this is in large part due to Valley Road taking 10,000 vehicles a day, much of which is cut through traffic. So these drivers are going to be cheesed off that their cut through route will be going.Not sure you can call Streatham Wells the suburbs. Also, car ownership there is still only about 50% and the highest areas are like 70% so lots of people are managing without.
Talk of gridlock caused by LTNs seems to be unfounded. I don’t see this on the Sth Circular despite Tulse Hill & Streatham Hill LTNs being either side. Fact is these roads, especially A23 through Streatham, are at capacity at the moment at peak times so can’t really get any worse, non local traffic will find other routes.
Most of the opposition to Streatham Wells LTN really seems to be from drivers worried that they’ll be inconvenienced which is at least more honest than with previous LTNs where they’ve tried to make out its for other reasons. But we’ve focussed on making everything convenient for drivers for decades now at the expense of everyone else so seems rather selfish for people to start chucking their toys out of the pram at being slightly inconvenienced to make things better for everyone.
Car ownership looks very mixed through Streatham - the census shows some streets where car free households are 20-30% (low for London) but also others where almost 70% of homes are car free (highest I saw was 69% scanning quickly).I'm worried that forcing LTNs onto the suburbs (where people genuinely rely on cars)
Hi,Grant Shapps warns councils to make roads more accessible for everyone | SWLondoner
More than 130 community groups released a joint statement last week in support of the introduction of Low Traffic Neighbourhoodwww.swlondoner.co.uk
Oval Triangle resident Francois Jardin, general manager of the Fentiman Arms pub, believes his quality of life has improved significantly with the reduction of noise pollution in particular.
Mr Jardin has also seen a positive impact socially with the LTN. He said: “I think the community forgot about the fact that they live next to each other and I think that is the impact that, socially speaking, is very beneficial.”
However, Mr Shapps acknowledged that when done well, the emergency measures have proved hugely popular with the ‘silent majority’.
“Millions of people, the vast majority of them non-cyclists, have already benefited from measures to reduce rat-running through narrow residential streets, cut danger to children around schools, make walking easier and provide safe space for cycling on main roads,” he wrote.
Probably the only thing I would agree with Shapps on.
The bit I know well on that map where car ownership is high is Valleyfield Road and Belltrees Grove. Both are on steep hills with really big houses, I don't recall seeing any converted into flats. Wealth plus hills = carsCar ownership looks very mixed through Streatham - the census shows some streets where car free households are 20-30% (low for London) but also others where almost 70% of homes are car free (highest I saw was 69% scanning quickly).
You could make an argument that improving walking and cycling for those car free households in areas where public transport is poorer should be even more of a priority than where it's good as you're giving better transport options to those without cars (cycling in many parts of Streatham and Norwood at the moment is grim enough to exclude all but the bravest).
Sustrans suggestions for criteria in prioritisation are here (using Lambeths map as an example)
Wells - View attachment 359383