What majority is that? Measured how, exactly? Looking at the comments I see on social media (not on dot life forums), the response to modal filters is absolutely scathing.
Apologies for the fruity language below (Facebook doesn’t attract the same quality of conversation that we do here), and don’t take my posting them here as a personal endorsement
I’m no expert here but doesn’t the majority of road tax go to the pockets of the Highways Agency for the upkeep of motorways? I’ve got by in London (two and a half years now) without a car but as soon as the dust settles I’m gonna buy one so I can move further out. Beyond the M25 you’re stranded without wheels.
Hi there - can you elaborate on the below at all? Thanks!
Vehicle Excise Duty is structured around CO2 emissions and is just general taxation i.e. goes into the big pot. It’s not X amount in, X amount back on roads.
It’s daft because it penalises people in towns who drive less. So if you drive 3000 miles in your 3.0L Merc you pollute less than 12,000 miles in your City runabout but you still pay more VED. Apparently a proposal to drop it and increase fuel duty was shot down because it was proportionally worse for people who live in the country.
Anyway, pollution in town is horrible if you want to walk or cycle anywhere - if road closures cause more congestion and more diesel fumes then that’s also not ideal. You can’t win.
The majority in Lewisham who don’t own cars which is around 53%.
I am part of the minority who do and am not anti-car just choose between using the car, walking or cycling. I tend to use the car for long journeys, bike for medium journeys and walking for local trips to the shops. I am avoiding public transport.
I don’t rate Facebook groups as most are controlled and tend to be similar people with shared opinions. I have to compliment .life forums for at least being a more open to all form of communication.
I will agree though with a lot of the criticism of the council that they seemed to forget basic commonsense about filtering/blocking roads. You need to give people advance notice, there wasn’t any from Sydenham or Dacres roads. You have to put in barriers that people can’t easily move, the last time I walked past, people had moved the signs/barriers.
Me too. I’m surprised by the lack of interest in what Councillor Gibbons has posted.
Please can you quote your source for this info? (I doubt it includes commuter journeys via the A205 at rush hours.)
So they don’t make decisions, they just ‘oversee’ them?
I am not sure you are right to place your faith in this process. These traffic officers are the same experts who preside over the worst pedestrian facilities in London (IN YOUR WARD). I am talking about the disgraceful pedestrian crossing in front of Forest Hill Station. It is absolutely clear that the current design prioritises the flow of motor transport on the A205, over pedestrians trying to get across the road.
It’s an air pollution nightmare, and the pedestrian island in the middle of the road is doubly unsafe as it’s impossible to keep 2m distance from other hapless walkers stranded waiting for the lights to change.
For @DevonishForester http://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-14-who-travels-by-car-in-london.pdf. ‘A little over a third (35 per cent) of all car trips are shorter than 2 km, just under a third (32 per cent) are between 2 and 5km and the remaining third are longer than 5km’. It is an illuminating read.
I’d never condone this kinda thing, just posted as it’s relevant:
Yes, the scheme is not without it’s troubles. News Shopper has had a few articles, and I believe some of the modal-filters near Blackheath were upgraded to bollards on the 22nd since the planters got moved or ignored.
At least some feedback from the commonplace scheme is being listened to:
Given the failings of the initial scheme I’d be interested to know how much taxpayer money was spent on it by the council.
We’re talking about a council that spent £30K on a “green wall” at Haseltine Primary last year that’s barely more than a few strands of ivy now.
They should plant clematis armandii with some supports - that would take it over in a year and cost a lot less!
Close to half a million, according to that News Shopper article.
That’s about the same amount as was spent building and then demolishing the Adamsrill School decant buildings on the Council (ie local taxpayer) owned depot on Willow Way. The contractors took pride in building it. Lovely buildings. Used for three terms, then demolished by some very upset contractors. The site remains derelict to this day. At least one local business tried to buy or rent it. And received a “no” from the Council. Sydenham Society funded a student project/report to come up with suggestions for multi use of the site (a Local Employment Zone) to fuel discussions with the Council. That report disappeared into Kafka Towers. The rest is silence.
I’m sorry but that’s a false statement. The actual article says:
This is despite the council starting work on a host of schemes across the borough, which it expects will cost £460,000.
There are clearly multiple schemes underway and it’s a cost estimate for ALL of them not just for Blackheath.
I’m not disputing that government wastes money at all levels (Garden Bridge anyone?) but I think your comment is selectively quoting a number to fit your narrative.
Apologies. But I wasn’t “selecting a number to suit [my] narrative”. I made a mistake. By the phrase “the scheme” I misinterpreted @anon5422159 as wondering what the entire scheme cost, rather than just that small part of it. I don’t need to select a narrative to suit my purposes, unlike elements of our Council and certain pressure groups.
So I will rephrase. According to the News shopper these temporary/trial road measures (still being called temporary trial measures) are costing 460k across the borough.
So how much do you say it cost?
Lewisham has form on wasting our money and I used the Adamsrill School decant as an example. Those buildings cost us 500k and could have been repurposed, rather than demolished after one academic year of use. The Kirkdale area had lost all its public infrastructure in the few years preceding that, including the Kirkdale Institute Adult Education Centre, so even if the area has plenty of children’s schools and facilities I’m sure a use could have been at least discussed.
I think a broader discussion about local government spending & efficiency would take us off topic.
What I do find daft is the people in the News Shopper story claiming they’re more likely to run over a kid if they have to drive past a school. Jeez if you’re genuinely worried about that then try cycling instead if you can, or perhaps even just slow down in general.
Dear Leo, thanks for this. The report only deals, however, with London Residents. What I think we really need is solid data on is how many long distance and medium distance commuters are driving through Forest Hill, New Cross and other busy locations every day. My guess is that many commuters (perhaps 40%) driving through the Borough every working day are coming in from Kent, Essex and Sussex via the A2 and A20. [edit. The report itself states that over one third of car journeys in London are non-resident drivers. I couldn’t see anything in the report about the differences between Boroughs in this respect. Also not clear overall where the data is from.]
It’s easy to penalise London residents with high charges for parking a car that they use once a week to go to Sainsbury’s and twice a year to go on holiday. But the non-resident commuters are paying nothing to drive through residential streets causing air pollution, noise pollution and congestion.
https://twitter.com/BBCTomEdwards/status/1277974899768700935?s=20 check these people out in Lewisham . Does anyone find driving on the pavement acceptable?
It makes a mockery of the scheme! Mind you, the scheme sounds like a bit of a mockery.
