One Dulwich have met with Cllr McAsh

[Spartacus]

A double decker can carry around 87 passengers which represents (based on most peoples perception of single car occupancy ) 87 cars not driving. 

Why oh why are TfL and the council not pushing for more buses and bus routes rather than driving towards penalising car owners who then can't make longer or essential ,(heavy shopping / goods or carrying those less able to walk) journeys? 

It isn't about being green but bringing in revenue for councils as they can charge for bays and for car clubs / lime to be in the Borough whilst making even more through fines.! 

[heartblock]

I'm fine with CPZ, the ability for parents to park or drop off at JAGs and Alleyn's with one child from the back of a huge SUV or 4-wheel-drive Range Rover also needs to be tackled - extraordinary parking tactics every morning.

On BBQs- it's not a whataboutary - I was challenged about being a liar... so I responded to the feathered-troll. It's also very salient. BBQs cause fires, produce particulates and are highly polluting, the LFB want's them banned - They attended more than 1,000 grass and open land fires in the first two months of Summer in 2022, I would happily have them banned from all private gardens and public parks in Southwark.

 

[exdulwicher]

15 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Why oh why are TfL and the council not pushing for more buses and bus routes rather than driving towards penalising car owners who then can't make longer or essential ,(heavy shopping / goods or carrying those less able to walk) journeys? 

They sort of are and the Superloop is coming to outer London soon but the problem in London is that you can't fit any more onto the roads. That's part of the reason they removed some services into central London or through London and out the other side (requiring a change midway although the Hopper fare means there's no additional charge), it's because the sheer number of buses going into places like Oxford Street, Strand, Regent Street etc was causing congestion in and of itself.

And any ideas about putting in 24/7 bus lanes gets met with howls of outrage and "what about the parking?" / "what about the elderly?", the result being there's a patchwork of confusing lanes that are sometimes in operation and sometimes not - and the times when they're needed for fast bus travel is also the times when everyone wants to park in them to access the shops.

All of this - the "penalising car owners", LTNs, CPZ, bus lanes, ULEZ etc has to work together. None of them, on their own, are the answer. They are all an answer, but none of them work to anything like their full potential unless backed up with complementary measures. If you just have ULEZ then everyone (OK *most people*) simply swap to a compliant vehicle and carry on driving, which solves nothing. If you have free/unrestricted parking, people will carry on driving cos it's cheap and convenient.

The challenge is that all of this is being introduced in a relatively short timeframe as our glorious leaders have very gradually come to the realisation that you can't just keep filling the roads with cars - if they'd actually have started this process 20+ years ago the initial pain of it now wouldn't be nearly as bad.

[malumbu]

Don't you think it is down to selfish drivers to give up their cars rather and use public transport more?  I've got first hand experience in this is what I have done.  And I expect that my family and I are typical of most around here.  Car gets used to the odd big shopping trip, Wickes, and holidays/occasional trips out that can't be easily managed by public transport.  You all know what my main form of transport is.

Financially a car club makes good sense, I haven't quite taken the plunge but it can't be far off.

DKH - the biggest disaster in recent years was the 2000 fuel protest that put back government push to get us out of our cars and cut emissions.  No government since has dared to upset motorists, what a shame.  The early Blair government was pushing things in the right direction and together with him destabalising the world, encouraging global terrorism, resulting in increase in refugees etc this was (changing policy on car use) his other crime.  Although tougher measures on reducing emissions would have been introduced if Brown had got in again.  (Happy for any journo to contact me as I know where the bodies were buried!)

 

[Spartacus]

Mal, let's look at what happened to the no 12, its gone from every 5 or 6 minutes to every 12 minutes (if you're lucky) 

Whilst I use it frequently, it's no longer a convenient bus to go to central London and there was talk of cutting it entirely.

It's a busy bus and it needs to be returned to its previous frequency to encourage people out of their cars.

Less is not more when it comes to public transport.

Years ago we had an excellent network of clean public transport including electric trams, more frequent buses and more trains but progression and the beeching report pushed people into car ownership which is where the current issue is.

Slowly over the past 50 years governments have eroded public transport to a point where the car became king and unless that erosion is reversed people will be reluctant to give up cars for packed limited public transport services.  

Let's be honest, if everyone here lost the use of their car tomorrow, buses and trains in their current service pattern and capacity would fail and people would avoid them due to lack of capacity 

More public transport is required, nor less and reducing capacity to free up central london was a massive blunder by TfL.

Edited July 8, 2023 by Spartacus
Fat finger spelling 😄

[heartblock]

53 minutes ago, exdulwicher said:

if they'd actually have started this process 20+ years ago the initial pain of it now wouldn't be nearly as bad.

There is no process even now - a bit of greenwashing here, a parklet there.. cuts to buses, privatisation, expensive train travel. Labour ditching the New Green Deal.

LTNs were put in to placate a few residents on some 'nice' rds, that's all - and now that data is being collected from places like Haringey the true picture of abject failure is clear.

I wish it had worked, I wish that there was a noticeable decrease in car use on my road, I wish the 37 bus route wasn't negatively effected - but it really hasn't improved the lives of those living on Croxted/ED Grove/Grove Vale/ LL/Crystal Palace Rd/ Barry Rd... need I go on.

So - it's good that McAsh has met with OD, I hope that the data is scrutinised, that plans are put in place for all these roads and that future interventions do not make traffic even worse.

[first mate]

ED,

What is your source for those Club Car stats? 

[CPR Dave]

 

Quote

If you just have ULEZ then everyone (OK *most people*) simply swap to a compliant vehicle and carry on driving, which solves nothing

This is moronic.

If everyone has switched to compliant cars then it has by definition solved the problem it set out to - anything other than ultra low  emissions.

 

The only possible way it would solve "nothing" would be if its sole purpose was not to reduce emissions but instead to pick peoples pockets with a greenwashing stealth tax. And we know full well that Labour and the LTN / ULEZ lobby would never be so dishonest.

Edited July 8, 2023 by CPR Dave

[vladi]

Southwark LTN planning?
 

[Bic Basher]

The cuts to public transport as ridership goes back up as more people return to work in-person have been damaging.   Bar London Overground, there have been cuts from the train operating companies under the DfT.

West Dulwich and Sydenham Hill have seen their services cut to 2 trains per hour for most of the day by Southeastern, while East Dulwich and North Dulwich are back up to four trains per hour.    Even Forest Hill and Honor Oak Park which has more trains combined than the Dulwich stations thanks to the Overground has seen their Southern London Bridge services cut from 4 trains per hour to 2.

As for buses, the bus lanes need to be proritised again with shared use for bikes.   Where there's space then of course have segregated bike lanes, but as seen in Waterloo where bus lanes have been converted into bike lanes or to extend the pavement, it's making bus journeys even longer.

[exdulwicher]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

ED,

What is your source for those Club Car stats? 

https://www.como.org.uk/shared-cars/overview-and-benefits

Scroll down, it's all there and there's access to all the reports from the last few years plus further links to the existing operators.

[first mate]

Thanks ED.

[vladi]

29 minutes ago, exdulwicher said:

https://www.como.org.uk/shared-cars/overview-and-benefits

Scroll down, it's all there and there's access to all the reports from the last few years plus further links to the existing operators.

The "reports" are all about  such and such "a percentage of respondents said"....

There's no raw data or analysis thereof on which the assertions are based.

Can you provide a more credible source?

[first mate]

I thought this was interesting https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11116-023-10386-0

[Pugwash]

We use our car at the most twice a week. I also carry 3 people to evening meetings as they have mobility/sight issues which makes it harder to use buses.

Also, site of meetings - some 5/10 mins away from bus route.

Car is essential for me as to see my family in Sussex involves bus, train, bus and walk, to visit - 3-4 hours depending on train. Family in Kent - 2/3 buses and 25 min walk up hill. Around 2-3 hours as buses are infrequent. 

I have an automatic car - when I was considering Zip cars  they only have manual transmission. 

[first mate]

Pugwash, I am with you on this. However, the message seems to be that although the council (and their LTN/CPZ supporters) are 'sorry for your pain' that the bigger picture is much more important and so regrettably you and others like you must make the sacrifice and accept your fate as collateral damage in the haste to rid our streets of all cars, come what may.

 

[heartblock]

The 'car' liberated many women. When the privileged among us had the carriage .... the poor wouldn't travel, women didn't travel on their own - it's a complicated relationship with the internal combustion engine. 

I support Just Stop Oil and other environmental lobby groups - at the same time despair at this Greenwashing Boris driven policy - supported by a mainly white, male, middle-class LCC types. It's bizarre that anyone really committed to green issues and a reduction in car use and pollution,  supports LTNs when one looks at the actual raw data.

Get PT sorted, support trams. buses, trains etc. LTNs .... pah! A diversion...

CPZ and ULEZ .. yes, but PT has to improve and the reduction of petrol engines to electric - compensated appropriately / free parking for services / wider application of disability and mobility rights - HAS to happen.

 

[first mate]

I felt the way things were going early when an LCC type objected to mobility scooters in cycle lanes because this would slow down cyclists like him. He felt mobility scooters should be in bus lanes or on the pavement...now of course, cyclists are increasingly on the pavements. 
 

There was also the Southwark cyclist rep who felt that unless you could walk, cycle or bus it to work, you should consider moving out of the area/ find another job. Black and white, no shades of grey at all.

[malumbu]

Pugwash - by all means keep driving.  Not sure what your issue is.  Your personal mobility is important to you.  It may cost you a bit more and hope you can afford it.  Anacdotal stuff FM, doesn't help the debate.

[Spartacus]

Can you demonstrate that they are anecdotal and not verbatim Mal. 

If they are as reported then it does leave the credibility of two people rather in tatters 

[heartblock]

[malumbu]

Ok so I'd like to see the source of these two militant cyclists and how two people are dictating the agenda. on a thread in a far away galaxy I've been reported as having a super power of being able to ban cars.

[first mate]

9 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Can you demonstrate that they are anecdotal and not verbatim Mal. 

If they are as reported then it does leave the credibility of two people rather in tatters 

One of the posters has left the forum, the other is still around. I am sure other posters involved in posts on CPZ, LTN and cycling infrastructure will remember the posts, as I called them out at the time. 
 

As Heartblock says, we need a much wider application of disability rights and querying what someone's issue is while commiserating they will have to pay more to get around, is a poor show in my view. Those who are disabled should not face financial penalties for using the tools (sometimes a car) they need to achieve greater independence and equality of opportunity.

[mr.chicken]

On 08/07/2023 at 13:04, heartblock said:

Yep  I would - I have, on this forum

Nope!

On 08/07/2023 at 13:04, heartblock said:

(suggesting local electric buses,

That makes busses less polluting but does nothing to tackle car use.

On 08/07/2023 at 13:04, heartblock said:

support ULEZ,

90% of cars in London are ULEZ compliant. This may be good for pollution, but it's not going to have a substantial and certainly not long term impact on car use.

On 08/07/2023 at 13:04, heartblock said:

suggested banning all petrol engine cars London-wide

Good for pollution and the one thing that would have an impact on car use for now if it was implemented right now. But we can also see from the congestion charge than any change will likely be temporary, and get swallowed up by the ever growing number of car.

On 08/07/2023 at 13:04, heartblock said:

 banning BBQs and wood-burners are a few)  - a simple search of my past posts will be testament et to this.

Two things which have NOTHING to do with reducing the number of cars.

So no, you are not advocating reducing car use you are only advocating reducing pollution in general including cars. That's good and all but those are NOT the same thing. Ultimately having a load of electric cars clogging up the roads so electric buses can't get through will not improve things for those trying to get around the area safely, cheaply and quickly.

 

[Spartacus]

14 minutes ago, mr.chicken said:

 

90% of cars in London are ULEZ compliant. This may be good for pollution, but it's not going to have a substantial and certainly not long term impact on car use.

 

Oh dear 

Repeating Mr Khans lie, sorry misspoken statement. You really must keep up with the truth. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66060758.amp