Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

[Athos]

Actually, there is a large proportion of the UK population living in quite similar streets to what you find in much of zone two london. Victorian terraces and edwardian semis.

Yes, but that's different from e.g. Vaubun, which is why 80% of UK households have at least one car.

 

[Athos]

Nearly 85% of the UK population is urban but Athos is using cheap sophistry to try and claim the interests of the suburban population of cities are the same as those of the rural popultion. Personally, I think cars are a bit like shotguns. Very dangerous but probably have a place in the countryside.

Yet 80% of households choose to have a car (and more would if they could afford one). Becuase public transport is nowhere near the point where not having a car wouldn't mean a significant dimunition in their quality of life for an enormous number of people.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I've been to a fair few places where cars are either banned outright (towns and villages in the Alps for example) or legally restricted (Mexico City) or socially engineered to be pretty pointless (Milan).

Enjoy them while you can boys. Their days are numbered.

I didn't notice a shortage of cars in Milan. The trams and trains are good though, particularly those ancient steampunky trams driven by an old bloke spinning a load of little brass valves back and forth.

 

[maomao]

Yet 80% of households choose to have a car (and more would if they could afford one). Becuase public transport is nowhere near the point where not having a car wouldn't mean a significant dimunition in their quality of life for an enormous number of people.

I don't think anyone on these boards has seriously suggested that banning private cars across the board without a significant change in basic infrastructure was doable or desirable but you constantly whine as if someone's going to come and take your fucking tractor off you by force.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Actually, there is a large proportion of the UK population living in quite similar streets to what you find in much of zone two london. Victorian terraces and edwardian semis.

And Victorian terraces, particularly the higher-density versions so common in the midlands and the north of England, are usually too closely packed and on streets too narrow for every house to have a car, all those cars to be parked on the street and both the street and the pavements to remain passable. Generally it is the pavement that is sacrificed to resolve this equation, to the detriment of wheelchair users etc. This was not a decision that was ever made at a policy level, just a consequence of the accumulated, self-reinforcing, self-interested acts of car owners.

 

[teuchter]

Yes, but that's different from e.g. Vaubun, which is why 80% of UK households have at least one car.

Once again, you are describing the problem that needs to be addressed, yet presenting it as a reason why we shouldn't try and solve it.

 

[teuchter]

And Victorian terraces, particularly the higher-density versions so common in the midlands and the north of England, are usually too closely packed and on streets too narrow for every house to have a car, all those cars to be parked on the street and both the street and the pavements to remain passable. Generally it is the pavement that is sacrificed to resolve this equation, to the detriment of wheelchair users etc. This was not a decision that was ever made at a policy level, just a consequence of the accumulated, self-reinforcing, self-interested acts of car owners.

Yes.
Victorian housing (and to some extent Edwardian) of course was built before private cars existed, and the urban grain that results is designed to work with public transport and foot traffic. It's not entirely a coincidence that these streets are often rather popular.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Once again, you are describing the problem that needs to be addressed, yet presenting it as a reason why we shouldn't try and solve it.

Almost as if he preferred the status quo to any situation that involved him making any kind of change in his behvaiour for the general public good.

I wouldn't support unilaterally getting rid of cars with zero public involvement or support, even if that were possible. But some people will have to be told 'no' in some form or other at some point. And it will require telling, not asking.

 

[Saul Goodman]

The problem with saying that areas are car free except for disabled people, which is what a lot of people say, is that it's not actually physically possible - the area ends up being arranged in such a way that driving a car is extremely slow and dangerous.

I know this is what some people want, of course, it being extremely inconvenient to drive, and to them it really doesn't matter if the inconvenience affects everyone, not just wasteful bastards.

Ghent is the same as other Dutch and Belgian cities - fantastic for cyclists, absolutely fucking shit for people in wheelchairs.

I don't know why they decided to just completely fuck over people with mobility problems when changing to priority for cycles, but they did.

But everyone holds those cities up as examples to follow.

Majorly improving public transport is the main change to make. There's not much point talking about banning cars or even massively discouraging them until there's a viable alternative on offer. The cost of driving lessons, fuel, etc is already a pretty major disincentive.

As always, people with disabilities are shat upon. But it's hardly surprising that cyclists couldn't care less, is it.

 

[8ball]

Yet 80% of households choose to have a car (and more would if they could afford one). Becuase public transport is nowhere near the point where not having a car wouldn't mean a significant dimunition in their quality of life for an enormous number of people.

This is the point. I live in a city that is very well-served by public transport and didn't have a car for nearly 2 decades living here (was very lucky to be given one at a time when it became useful due to personal circumstances).

Where I live at the moment, I'd happily move to a model where you can pay a reasonable subscription or fee or whatever and jump in a nearby car to pick up something heavy, go off for a bit or whatever, but transferring that to rural areas (or even a shitload of urban areas) isn't easy.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Of course it does. These tubes are going on a ridiculously flawed study by Cycling UK

University of Bath
European Journal of Public Health
University of Nottingham
Rode et al 2018 - Does a yellow jacket enhance conspicuity?

 

[Doodler]

A small contribution to your thread, teuchter. Many historical accounts record how people often walked considerable distances around Britain using the roads. They didn't do so for fun, but because they were journeyman artisans or were seeking seasonal work in different parts of the country. The point is that they were able to do so - roads weren't particularly dangerous to walk along, at least not from traffic. As a child I remember that seeing people walking along the sides of country roads was uncommon but not very rare, the same with hitchhikers. Today many country roads and lanes are dangerous to walk along because of the increased volume of traffic and, at times, its speed. There is a certain irony in the way a traditional aspect of rural life has been obliterated, that of being able to walk along a country lane, by those who are often keen to buy into the image of country living by inhabiting 'The Old Smithy' or 'The Old Stables' and driving a big 4WD vehicle.

 

[maomao]

As always, people with disabilities are shat upon. But it's hardly surprising that cyclists couldn't care less, is it.

Let's not forget car accidents are a leading cause of disability in the first place eh.

 

[teuchter]

A small contribution to your thread, teuchter. Many historical accounts record how people often walked considerable distances around Britain using the roads. They didn't do so for fun, but because they were journeyman artisans or were seeking seasonal work in different parts of the country. The point is that they were able to do so - roads weren't particularly dangerous to walk along, at least not from traffic. As a child I remember that seeing people walking along the sides of country roads was uncommon but not very rare, the same with hitchhikers. Today many country roads and lanes are dangerous to walk along because of the increased volume of traffic and, at times, its speed. There is a certain irony in the way a traditional aspect of rural life has been obliterated, that of being able to walk along a country lane, by those who are often keen to buy into the image of country living by inhabiting 'The Old Smithy' or 'The Old Stables' and driving a big 4WD vehicle.

Absolutely.
Many country lanes are essentially footpaths that have been appropriated by cars and are now largely inaccessible to pedestrians (especially at night). This leads to more vicious circle scenarios, and drink driving to rural pubs is one of them. I would have any road where there's not space for a proper footpath alongside it designated 10mph 'shared space'. There are many places in the countryside where there's a shop (or could be a shop) within 10 minutes walk of many houses and yet people don't feel safe doing that walk because there's no footpath.

 

[Athos]

I don't think anyone on these boards has seriously suggested that banning private cars across the board without a significant change in basic infrastructure was doable or desirable but you constantly whine as if someone's going to come and take your fucking tractor off you by force.

Well, some people do seem to imply they'd like to see private cars banned before the completion of the replacement infrastructure (albeit they resile from saying so explicitly). If what's being proposed is that the infrastrcuture is improved to the extent that many people willingly forego car ownership, I'm all for that.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Well, some people do seem to imply they'd like to see private cars banned before the completion of the replacement infrastructure (albeit they resile from saying so explicitly). If what's being proposed is that the infrastrcuture is improved to the extent that many people willingly forego car ownership, I'm all for that.

They kinda have to happen in tandem. You can't create certain bits of infrastructure without removing others etc.

There will inevitably be times in the transition where it's all a mess and a pain in the arse for everyone. But so what?

 

[Athos]

Once again, you are describing the problem that needs to be addressed, yet presenting it as a reason why we shouldn't try and solve it.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try to solve it; I'm just not sure we agree on the best way to do so.

 

[maomao]

Well, some people do seem to imply they'd like to see private cars banned before the completion of the replacement infrastructure (albeit they resile from saying so explicitly).

So you're not actually taking part in a discussion you're replying to arguments that you think some (unnamed of course) posters have implied? Maybe you could start another thread just for that because it sounds special enough to deserve one.

 

[Athos]

They kinda have to happen in tandem. You can't create certain bits of infrastructure without removing others etc.

There will inevitably be times in the transition where it's all a mess and a pain in the arse for everyone. But so what?

True enough, but in rural areas there's a LOT more that needs to be done to iprove public transport before any attempt to disuade people from using their cars would have any impact.

 

[Spymaster]

University of Bath
European Journal of Public Health
University of Nottingham
Rode et al 2018 - Does a yellow jacket enhance conspicuity?

All been done here before. All of them state that HV improves perception of the cyclists at a distance and they say that there was an insignificant difference in collision rates. What they can't say is how many drivers who spot the cyclists at distance changed their behaviours to avoid the collisions as a result. There's another one that says reflective clothing (rather than HV) should be worn at night. Surprised you din't wheel that one out as well.

 

[Athos]

So you're not actually taking part in a discussion you're replying to arguments that you think some (unnamed of course) posters have implied? Maybe you could start another thread just for that because it sounds special enough to deserve one.

I explicitly challanged teuchter on that pont, but the answer was still unclear.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

True enough, but in rural areas there's a LOT more that needs to be done to iprove public transport before any attempt to disuade people from using their cars would have any impact.

Absolutely. That's why I believe we need to sort the cities first. Then as I said earlier in the thread, you create facilities for those arriving from out of town to transfer onto local transport links in for the final miles - be these local buses, trains, trams or even Boris style hire bikes.

 

[xenon]

Per car. And it's been unfashionable (unbless you're an American cab driver or a cunt in a lambro) for a couple of decades but cars used to be a much wider variety of colours. And white ones, orange ones and yellow ones have less accidents per car.

This orange one was responsible for quite a lot of accidents....

 

[Saul Goodman]

And for the four hundredth time, 'cyclist' is not a job title, or a religion, or an ethnic group or a political affiliation. I know this may be hard to grasp if you have a car instead of a personality, but people's chosen transport modalities are not actually their defining features.

Then why is it that such an overwhelming majority of cyclists are bereft of the same qualities? Surely that can't be a coincidence?

 

[Winot]

If what's being proposed is that the infrastrcuture is improved to the extent that many people willingly forego car ownership, I'm all for that.

You are effectively saying that you are happy for cars to be banned once there is no longer a desire for them. That’s too high a bar.

Infrastructure/public transport is never going to provide an equivalent experience to an individual’s journey in his own car. It’s why we need to act to dissuade car use by making it more difficult/expensive (at the same time as making the alternative more attractive).

 

[teuchter]

I explicitly challanged teuchter on that pont, but the answer was still unclear.

No it wasn't, my answer was dead clear in that the alternatives have to be provided. I gave you two quotes form earlier in the thread where I say that.

 

[Athos]

You are effectively saying that you are happy for cars to be banned once there is no longer a desire for them. That’s too high a bar.

Infrastructure/public transport is never going to provide an equivalent experience to an individual’s journey in his own car. It’s why we need to act to dissuade car use by making it more difficult/expensive (at the same time as making the alternative more attractive).

I think it'd make sense if the financial costs to motorists refect the true social cost of chosing to drive when there are trutly adequate alternatives.

 

[Athos]

No it wasn't, my answer was dead clear in that the alternatives have to be provided. I gave you two quotes form earlier in the thread where I say that.

Hmmm... still seems a bit light on any real detail.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Yellow cars have nearly 50% less accidents black and grey cars do. What colour is your car? Driving a car any other colour than white, yellow or orange is pure vanity and endangers lives.

So you admit that hi-vis makes a difference?

 

[8ball]

...create facilities for those arriving from out of town to transfer onto local transport links in for the final miles - be these local buses, trains, trams or even Boris style hire bikes.

So that the untrained yokels get poleaxed by a 16-wheeler at the first junction...