Lockdown - has it made driving slower and drivers more courteous?

[madcow]

Oh and speak of the devil here's a member of parliament objecting to homes for people to live in. Because of fucking car parking. Her complaint is that there isn't enough.

https://mobile.twitter.com/russellcurtis/status/1260170500833148929

Actually, parking comes 4th on the list of four objections.

The irony, of course, is that car parking is an issue in a place that has regular buses, tube, and train. It's the same here, they're arguing about parking for development that is opposite the train station.

There is an assessment of the public transport provision in one of the letters, saying that half the new flats don't have as good access.

Parking is always an issue in developments, and will be until there is change in planning law and change in government focus.

Unless I was looking at the wrong thing, everything on the development was within a few minutes of New Barnet station.

But really, give people an incentive not to own a car. Every single local development here fouls up on parking, whether they be good or bad. It's just even more insane when the proposed development is in the town centre, between two supermarkets, across the road from the train station and bus stops. Less than a minute's walk to any of these. But they have to have acres of parking.

At same time, as I mentioned a while back, there's a development of houses in the field in the middle of nowhere, the only access by car. The council as far as I could tell turned permission down for that but they were overruled. So there's an estate of houses in which there's no other option to get in or out (OK, I'll be charitable, there is about fifteen minutes of muddy, unlit public footpath down a steep hill and across a dual carriageway, the one you'd need to cycle down if that were your preferred mode of transport).

I'm sure these examples are replicated up and down and across the breadth of the country.

Obviously, banning cars is a bit silly, but we really need to factor in how we build sustainable communities at every level, which of course doesn't happen. Cars should be optional. But I think we also need to occaisonally sacrifice some of the convenience of our car-central lifestyle. We can't do everything that we want, when we want.

Once we get out of this mess, there's going to be plenty of city/town centre property that could be converted to residential use.
It needs commercial property owners  to face reality and local authorities to stop kidding themselves that they can endlessly "regenerate the High Street."
Urban planners need to rethink the area of retail to reflect reality.

[sg37409]

The lockdown would have been a lot different had car use been restricted.  Either by means of a very high price or controlling the availability of it to key workers etc.    The roads were much quieter here during the fuel blockades of 2000 than even the height of the lockdown.

As a society I don't think we are ready for that.  We saw the panic on toilet rolls and pasta.  I wouldn't be surprised if controlling the fuel outlets leads to rioting and mass panic.  As a society we also haven't seen a change in behaviour related to fuel price.  It would need to be a huge increase before it could influence car use.

[Jaded]

Oh and speak of the devil here's a member of parliament objecting to homes for people to live in. Because of fucking car parking. Her complaint is that there isn't enough.

https://mobile.twitter.com/russellcurtis/status/1260170500833148929

Actually, parking comes 4th on the list of four objections.

The irony, of course, is that car parking is an issue in a place that has regular buses, tube, and train. It's the same here, they're arguing about parking for development that is opposite the train station.

There is an assessment of the public transport provision in one of the letters, saying that half the new flats don't have as good access.

Parking is always an issue in developments, and will be until there is change in planning law and change in government focus.

Unless I was looking at the wrong thing, everything on the development was within a few minutes of New Barnet station.

But really, give people an incentive not to own a car. Every single local development here fouls up on parking, whether they be good or bad. It's just even more insane when the proposed development is in the town centre, between two supermarkets, across the road from the train station and bus stops. Less than a minute's walk to any of these. But they have to have acres of parking.

At same time, as I mentioned a while back, there's a development of houses in the field in the middle of nowhere, the only access by car. The council as far as I could tell turned permission down for that but they were overruled. So there's an estate of houses in which there's no other option to get in or out (OK, I'll be charitable, there is about fifteen minutes of muddy, unlit public footpath down a steep hill and across a dual carriageway, the one you'd need to cycle down if that were your preferred mode of transport).

I'm sure these examples are replicated up and down and across the breadth of the country.

Obviously, banning cars is a bit silly, but we really need to factor in how we build sustainable communities at every level, which of course doesn't happen. Cars should be optional. But I think we also need to occaisonally sacrifice some of the convenience of our car-central lifestyle. We can't do everything that we want, when we want.

Once we get out of this mess, there's going to be plenty of city/town centre property that could be converted to residential use.
It needs commercial property owners  to face reality and local authorities to stop kidding themselves that they can endlessly "regenerate the High Street."
Urban planners need to rethink the area of retail to reflect reality.

Only if the rush to online continues after the lockdown. Otherwise you are putting people in towns and giving them nothing to do - so they will drive to out of town retail centres...

[Solocle]

I'm not actually measuring square mile that is being figurative.

What actually matters is that as you can see, the inner London boroughs with these marvellous "superhighways" are some of the most dangerous places you can ride a bike in the UK. And that's with people being terrified off of cycling them in the first place, let alone if we had a surge of tens or even hundreds of thousands of people giving it a go because they're frightened to use the tube etc. We'll probably see something similar happen with scooters since many are taking to those too. Sacrificed on the altar of the Motor God.

In fact that reminds me. TFL really need to track scooters under their own tab on this map...

That's a logical fallacy. Far more people use the superhighways. I've cycled on the A4020, last time I went into London. It has a trickle of fatal crashes.

I could instead use the A40, which has maybe one or two fatal crashes.

I've cycled on the A40 (Westway) by accident. It's a hellish 3-lane former motorway. By any objective measure, it's far more dangerous than Uxbridge Road.

But, because any cyclists following that corridor tend to use Uxbridge Road, rather than the A40, the A4020 appears more dangerous by absolute numbers.

What's needed is KSI/cycling mile.

[Davef]

The lockdown would have been a lot different had car use been restricted.  Either by means of a very high price or controlling the availability of it to key workers etc.    The roads were much quieter here during the fuel blockades of 2000 than even the height of the lockdown.

As a society I don't think we are ready for that.  We saw the panic on toilet rolls and pasta.  I wouldn't be surprised if controlling the fuel outlets leads to rioting and mass panic.  As a society we also haven't seen a change in behaviour related to fuel price.  It would need to be a huge increase before it could influence car use.

M40 one lunchtime a couple of weeks back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Cudzoziemiec]

I don't think we can talk about the effects of fuel price increase until we have some significant price increases.

[bludger]

What's needed is KSI/cycling mile.

that won't give the real figure because people are frightened to cycle on those roads. Because they are dangerous, evidenced by the video footage of a motorist just left-turning across the "murder strip" of the superhighway and send a cyclist flying like a children's doll.

What we actually need is action that bans cars like the Mayor of Paris has rather than sit about navel gazing on what the best way to count dead or hospitalised cyclists is. The toolkit to achieve that can include road user charging, modal filters, stricter licensing, physically segregated cycleways, subsidised access to cycling, replacing free on-street car storage with free secure cycle parking, ending the subsidies given to motorists, reforming planning and much else but fundamentally it comes down to telling cars and their drivers to fuck off or face charges from the government.

Here's a fantastic picture of the "superhighway" by the way...



Clown car.

[Solocle]

The lockdown would have been a lot different had car use been restricted.  Either by means of a very high price or controlling the availability of it to key workers etc.    The roads were much quieter here during the fuel blockades of 2000 than even the height of the lockdown.

As a society I don't think we are ready for that.  We saw the panic on toilet rolls and pasta.  I wouldn't be surprised if controlling the fuel outlets leads to rioting and mass panic.  As a society we also haven't seen a change in behaviour related to fuel price.  It would need to be a huge increase before it could influence car use.

M40 one lunchtime a couple of weeks back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This was the A303 last month:

And two days ago:

[Davef]

The lockdown would have been a lot different had car use been restricted.  Either by means of a very high price or controlling the availability of it to key workers etc.    The roads were much quieter here during the fuel blockades of 2000 than even the height of the lockdown.

As a society I don't think we are ready for that.  We saw the panic on toilet rolls and pasta.  I wouldn't be surprised if controlling the fuel outlets leads to rioting and mass panic.  As a society we also haven't seen a change in behaviour related to fuel price.  It would need to be a huge increase before it could influence car use.

M40 one lunchtime a couple of weeks back.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This was the A303 last month:

And two days ago:

That is some pretty rapid bridge construction. Impressive.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jaded]

What's needed is KSI/cycling mile.

that won't give the real figure because people are frightened to cycle on those roads. Because they are dangerous, evidenced by the video footage of a motorist just left-turning across the "murder strip" of the superhighway and send a cyclist flying like a children's doll.

What we actually need is action that bans cars like the Mayor of Paris has rather than sit about navel gazing on what the best way to count dead or hospitalised cyclists is. The toolkit to achieve that can include road user charging, modal filters, stricter licensing, physically segregated cycleways, subsidised access to cycling, replacing free on-street car storage with free secure cycle parking, ending the subsidies given to motorists, reforming planning and much else but fundamentally it comes down to telling cars and their drivers to fuck off or face charges from the government.

Here's a fantastic picture of the "superhighway" by the way...



Clown car.

That'll be the government they elect will it?

[sg37409]

..  The roads were much quieter here during the fuel blockades of 2000 than even the height of the lockdown.

This is anecdotal. I live on a main commuting road outside Glasgow. At the peak of the lockdown, there was still traffic on the roads at commute times and in the evenings.  I remember towards the end of the fuel blockades my cycle commutes to linlithgow along the A803. The roads were eerily quiet. It was like a ghost town.   Any car you saw wasn't speeding.

I don't think we can talk about the effects of fuel price increase until we have some significant price increases.

I don't understand what you mean here sorry.

[bludger]

That'll be the government they elect will it?

Fallacious implication. It was only fairly recently (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32061822) that public opinion turned against hanging. That didn't stop it being repealed in 1968.

Governments provide leadership. Or at least they ought to. Going with the breeze and kicking the can down the road is government failure.

People instinctively are protective of cars but they also want firm action on climate change and other important problems (https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/5y7qpjzd6v/NEON_CoronavirusClimate_200417_W.pdf ; https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/xlz28wjcpt/YGC_GB_environmental__attitudes.pdf) so it's a government's role to see the long term big picture and be brave, not go with the breeze. As they did with repealing hanging.

[Jaded]

It isn't 1968 any more.

[bludger]

That is literally my entire point...

[Cudzoziemiec]

What we actually need is action that bans cars like the Mayor of Paris has

Hidalgo is a mayor who not only wants to take bold action but is able to do so thanks to actually being in charge of her city. 

Unfortunately most British mayors are not in as strong a position, being reliant on cooperation with larger authorities such as counties and combined unitaries, meaning even on the rare occasions they do feel bold, they get overruled. 

[bludger]

This is a rare instance where no one is going to get overruled by the government in measures that ban cars, using modal filters, segregated cycleways, road dieting etc, because the DFT has published that:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reallocating-road-space-in-response-to-covid-19-statutory-guidance-for-local-authorities/traffic-management-act-2004-network-management-in-response-to-covid-19

The government therefore expects local authorities to make significant changes to their road layouts to give more space to cyclists and pedestrians. Such changes will help embed altered behaviours and demonstrate the positive effects of active travel. I’m pleased to see that many authorities have already begun to do this, and I urge you all to consider how you can begin to make use of the tools in this guidance, to make sure you do what is necessary to ensure transport networks support recovery from the COVID-19 emergency and provide a lasting legacy of greener, safer transport.

The writing is on the wall. We're hearing the inevitable "it's tooooo haaaard" noises but whatever. Lives are on the line.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Crossing my fingers, written to the councillors, not holding my breath.

[bludger]

https://www.ft.com/content/9fbfcf58-c710-40b0-91ee-0811686fa391#

You love to see it!

City of London to ban cars on busiest roads as lockdown eases

[Jaded]

That is literally my entire point...

I'm not sure it is. In 1968 governments could do things like that.

nowadays we have Brexit.

[psyclist]

This is a rare instance where no one is going to get overruled by the government in measures that ban cars, using modal filters, segregated cycleways, road dieting etc, because the DFT has published that:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reallocating-road-space-in-response-to-covid-19-statutory-guidance-for-local-authorities/traffic-management-act-2004-network-management-in-response-to-covid-19

The government therefore expects local authorities to make significant changes to their road layouts to give more space to cyclists and pedestrians. Such changes will help embed altered behaviours and demonstrate the positive effects of active travel. I’m pleased to see that many authorities have already begun to do this, and I urge you all to consider how you can begin to make use of the tools in this guidance, to make sure you do what is necessary to ensure transport networks support recovery from the COVID-19 emergency and provide a lasting legacy of greener, safer transport.

The writing is on the wall. We're hearing the inevitable "it's tooooo haaaard" noises but whatever. Lives are on the line.

Thank you for providing the link. I have been in contact with my council, and have now used this to push a bit harder in respect to what action they are now taking in respect to active travel. I'm not hopeful, but I think now is the time to put a little more pressure on.

[ian]

Sometimes it's the little things. Enforcement of a pavement parking ban, for instance, and parking in general. Those little nudges force us to think differently about the place for cars, there relative import and impact in our lives.

That said, I'm shocked in 2020 that it's still possible to pave over your front garden as a parking space.

[Tim Hall]

Sometimes it's the little things. Enforcement of a pavement parking ban, for instance, and parking in general. Those little nudges force us to think differently about the place for cars, there relative import and impact in our lives.

That said, I'm shocked in 2020 that it's still possible to pave over your front garden as a parking space.

Paradise went that way ages ago.

[hatler]

All hail St Joni.

[Hot Flatus]

Went out yesterday at 5pm. I'd say traffic was back to pre-virus levels.  Quite incredible

[DuncanM]

I had to collect some stuff from the office today (it's all going to be sold on Friday). Traffic wasn't quite at pre-virus rush hour levels, but it was probably at regular weekend levels busy.

The plan for a Zero Emissions Zone in central Oxford has been delayed by the virus. The first version is almost entirely symbolic (6 streets, most of which are dead ends and never driven down), but I assume this will delay zones 2 and 3, which would have actually had an impact.
https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20299/air_quality_projects/1305/oxford_zero_emission_zone_zez