And more excellent news for Londoners.
What a self-contradictory plan:
So, to summarise:
-
Will Norman acknowledges congestion issues on London roads affect public safety as emergency service vehicles (and many others) rely on those roads being free-flowing. He acknowledges the current reduction in traffic is only temporary.
-
The same Will Norman proposes narrowing roads and restricting to bikes only
He’s an ideologue with a narrow agenda, and he’s exploiting our distraction during the Covid crisis to implement plans that will hurt the interests of millions of Londoners, directly and indirectly. He’s not interested in making real environmental progress (eg electric vehicles). He just wants to take an axe to all road users aside from cyclists and pedestrians.
I suppose this was inevitable given his job title: “Mayor of London’s walking and cycling commissioner”.
Where is the “Mayor of London’s vehicle user commissioner”?
Where’s the balance in this policy making?
This is excellent news. There are so many touch points particularly on TfL operated roads where it impossible to maintain any significant distance. And are impossible to avoid. I wonder if they can do something with pedestrian islands.
3 Likes
Really hard to see why anyone would oppose more social distancing on our streets to save lives given the appalling loss of life that is going on in London.
3 Likes
Like many things at present, ideas are being forced through as their is a pressing need. It will be interesting to see some analysis of these changes and public sentiment once they are in place, and whether their is a clamor to go back or to leave them as is (perhaps with amendments).
3 Likes
“Modal filters” meaning removing access to certain modes of transport. It means car owners will still pay the same road tax but thanks to activists within the council, their access to the road will be reduced.
And all the vehicles we rely on for deliveries, tradesmen, carers, emergency services etc will be negatively affected too. Ambulances may be in “the minority” of road users but I think they have more right to use the roads than pedestrians, who already have footpaths!
Classic zero-sum policy-making, which will simply increase congestion elsewhere and force drivers to make longer journeys due to road closures.
This divisive policy wasn’t on the councillor’s manifesto so I hope the council will perform (and honour) a public consultation beforehand.
1 Like
I think it sounds really good, less car use is in everyone’s interests, especially now.
1 Like
Except for anyone that needs to use a car? Or those who rely on people driving to them? Or do those people not count?
We’re meant to be doing big shops infrequently. I can barely fit all my shopping into my car boot. I’d like to see how the council propose I carry it all on my bike.
Also, from a Covid point of view, in a car I am shielded, and shield the world. Not so much if I’m walking or cycling
3 Likes
Lots of people manage without cars, do you truly need one? They’re polluting, cause congestion, take up loads of space per person and the majority don’t have one so I think it’s right that policy should cater as much as possible to pedestrians and public transport users. If the result of this is a reduction in number of cars that’s a good thing, and I expect the council will account for people who genuinely rely on them.
3 Likes
Ah, the tyranny of the masses.
Sure, you could probably get by without electricity if you really set your mind to it. But if you want to cut my electricity supply off, you’d better have a more compelling argument than “well most people make different choices, so yours is going to have to change”
And by the way my car produces zero emissions, is parked on my drive, and congestion is really not a thing at the moment.
Not sure that analogy makes sense, everyone has electricity… Great that congestion isn’t a thing right now, if only we could keep it that way!
You won’t keep it that way by narrowing and blocking roads FFS!
Will do if it reduces non-essential personal car use.
When driving, I think my road use would be safer and more pleasant if all cyclists were banned from the road
And when I’m cycling, I think my road use would be safer and more pleasant if all cars were banned from the road
But I rise above these daft and selfish zero-sum attitudes and choose to share the road with my fellow citizens, without having the bare-faced cheek to tell them how they should and shouldn’t be transporting themselves. I wish our trusted councillors could do so.
Obviously I make an exception for quad bike nutters and the moped mafia. They can foxtrot oscar!
1 Like
Right, except cars and other motor vehicles are objectively worse for other peoples health than cyclists or pedestrians are and private cars take up far more room per passenger than any other form of transport, so actually I think it’s pretty reasonable to take issue with them.
I’m not sure sure why you’re being so absolutist either, neither I nor anything above talks about banning or preventing all cars.
And are they your councillors? Your bio suggests you aren’t living here any more, which seems odd given level of interest in local traffic management…
Ah here we go. The “you’re not from round ‘ere” argument I always hear when other counter-arguments to my points have dwindled.
I lived in Lewisham for five years and I know it very well, thanks to my network there, and via this forum. You don’t lose your interest in an area the day after you’ve left it. And I don’t want other Lewisham residents to face the same issues that led me to leave. One of the reasons I moved out of Lewisham was its dreadful roads - made even more dreadful by councillors pursuing their ideological agendas against car ownership.
Turning the majority against a minority. How community spirited of them…
1 Like
But I didn’t stop making other points, they’re right there in the same post. I think you’ve probably heard the argument before though because it is strange that you’re on a very specific local forum debating local issues and moaning about other people’s council. I’ll leave it there I think, it’s getting a bit weird now we’re talking about minorities as if motorists are some persecuted sect and not actually just people who like having cars in a place where most people really don’t need one.
It’s strange I’m on this forum? Perhaps it wasn’t clear, but I created this forum, funded it for the last four years, promoted it heavily on social media and continue to do so - for the benefit of the SE23 community that I am still connected to and still care about.
I have a natural aversion to divisive BS, which is why I’m arguing against the “moral hierarchy of road users” that you and others have put forward to support the selfish “reclaiming of the roads” by one group at the expense of another.
2 Likes
Thanks for the link Chris. It’s a great opportunity for everyone to get involved with Lewisham’s efforts with this. I hope a lot of our local peeps will take the time to respond.
4 Likes
I’m all for cleaner air, less pollution and congestion and safer streets, but this initiative seems a bit muddled and a mix of agendas.
Things like temporary widening of pavements to help social distancing at pinch points are a no-brainer and should just be done automatically where practical and needed to help protect the population, just like in the photo used as an example on the site:
But once the dust settles on all this and we try to work out what the new normal needs to be, we may find we need some of the roads back to serve businesses and commuters and help get the economy back on it’s feet. What makes sense now, may not make sense for the future.
3 Likes