Transport Secretary calls for LTN review, blames "controversial" schemes for setting "people against each other"

brooksby wrote:

And the only way that most people can even be 'encouraged' to try modes of transport other than just getting in the car, is to make it "difficult" for motorists.  If you don't make it difficult or less convenient, why would they bother?

Quick show of hands: who thinks that Mr Harper has ridden a bike anywhere other than a Center Parcs since the age of twelve?

What seems odd to me is that there's invariably lots of engagement with local people when LTNs are proposed, but I've never been asked to contribute opinions about new roads. It's almost as though some politicians are trying to use "democratic process" to stifle LTNs and promote roads for purely motorised traffic.

Thats because as you say, it is a restriction. We have a small country that is very built up in small condensed areas and there simply isn't enough room for proper cycling infrastructure and good car access so building one takes away from the other. 

Problem is, 90% or more of people couldn't give a flying fuck about bikes and just see them as a nuisance. They will see a cyclist holding up traffic and whinge and then unironically sit there for 10 minutes in gridlock without a second thought to the irony. 

mctrials23 wrote:

Thats because as you say, it is a restriction. We have a small country that is very built up in small condensed areas and there simply isn't enough room for proper cycling infrastructure and good car access so building one takes away from the other. 

Problem is, 90% or more of people couldn't give a flying fuck about bikes and just see them as a nuisance. They will see a cyclist holding up traffic and whinge and then unironically sit there for 10 minutes in gridlock without a second thought to the irony. 

It's not so much to do with being a small country though. The U.S. has huge amounts of space, but almost all of that space is allocated to motorised traffic. The problem is that as you allocate more space to cars, then facilities tend to be spread further apart which then requires even more space. It's the "one more lane" fallacy coupled with induced demand.

Bicycle infrastructure doesn't suffer from the same problem as it's so much more compact and cyclists can be far more flexible about how much space they require.

Our streets are too narrow - we've got tiny mediaeval streets just not built for cycling.  And we've got a really high population density in a small country.  And unlike other places we've got lots of people who own cars here, and we have to travel further [1] [2].

My city (Edinburgh) is not particularly different from much of the UK (OK, we're at the start of the beginning with active travel, maybe).  One thing I noticed over the last few years though.  There's have been a lot of works which have completely blocked lanes or entire roads and some of these have been in place for time - weeks, months or (Leith Walk) off and on for years.  Some of these are "major distributor routes".

Are people dying because they're trapped in their houses?  Have the council been hunted down by hard-pressed SUV-equipped drivers?

No.  The world hasn't ended.

I suspect even in the UK a local authority with enough chuzpah* could find a whole bunch of space in almost every place by some smart choices at the network level.  Which could be implemented quick and cheap with just concrete blocks, bollards, paint and signs.  (Unlike the usual rubbish they'd have to make it actually block drivers though).

See for example what Amsterdam has done and is planning with "home networks" for different modes - hoofdnetten and plusnetten.

* No shortage of individuals at the top of L.A.s with that.  Sadly often seems ... misapplied.  For evidence read e.g. Private Eye and get depressed.

Simply no room... (sorry, this one again)

mctrials23 wrote:

Thats because as you say, it is a restriction. We have a small country that is very built up in small condensed areas and there simply isn't enough room for proper cycling infrastructure and good car access so building one takes away from the other. 

Problem is, 90% or more of people couldn't give a flying fuck about bikes and just see them as a nuisance. They will see a cyclist holding up traffic and whinge and then unironically sit there for 10 minutes in gridlock without a second thought to the irony. 

Keep posting it, it's a beauty.

That's the sort of thing I argued in the local rag.
I was told I was micromanaging people by supporting active travel.
When I pointed out their decision to do nothing and allow pollution, congestion, health issues was also micromanaging, I got no reply.
Not the only situation I've found where people believe that doing nothing is not a decision.

Standard - opportunity cost.  "We are where we are". Well, yes... but we weren't always here.  Nor will we be.

We are only where we are because of some choices.  Even if those were just "do nothing".  And in the case of motor vehicles it isn't true that "it just happened because everyone bought them".  There were very active political choices, lobbying and resources devoted to bringing this about.

For the future - is it OK to continue on the current path?

If not, then that will mean ... change?  And that won't happen by itself, or by doing just a little bit more - otherwise it already would have.

We've been "encouraging active travel" ineffectively for decades now.

But nobody is being restricted in choosing to travel by car if they want. They are only being restricted in their choice of route. If those that believe that this is a restriction of their fundamental rights then I would like to think they also support the Right to Roam - although I suspect they won't.

IanMK wrote:

But nobody is being restricted in choosing to travel by car if they want. They are only being restricted in their choice of route. If those that believe that this is a restriction of their fundamental rights then I would like to think they also support the Right to Roam - although I suspect they won't.

In a discussion on a different website, I literally had someone tell me that the right to drive whenever and wherever you want was a human right.

Haha. Is he referring to the Freedom of Movement? I don't think that defines a route only a destination. 

Let's hope he didn't vote Brexit 

He didn't.  On many issues he's quite progressive - but not when it comes to getting in the way of his car (or motorbike).

Sounds like you’ve found Martin’s new haunt.

So, this guy thinks that if a local authority restricts a narrow lane to pedestrian traffic only (banning cars), they’re violating his basic human rights? If a farmer prevents him from driving through his fields to get somewhere (not specifically illegal - I drive through my fields all the time, they’re just not public rights of way), the farmer is violating his basic human rights?

I swear, some people honestly seem to crap their brains out as soon as they get behind the wheel.

We just need to wait till the general election when they'll all be booted out of office. 

Miller wrote:

We just need to wait till the general election when they'll all be booted out of office. 

Be careful what you wish for.  Does anyone think Starmer will be better?  The most we could hope for is that he will be not quite so bad.

cycling people in Berlin, where the new conservative government has stopped all cycling improvement schemes, are really good at making themselves seen, through critical mass events etc. I thought at first that these events could be quite easily dismissed as a minority, but seeing lots of children and posters calling for the right to travel safely, is actually quietly powerful

HoldingOn wrote:

Everyone take note - if a number of people cry loud enough, the government will act.

Cyclists clearly haven't been crying loud enough over the unsafe roads we're forced to risk every time we attempt to choose cycling as our mode of travel.

STOP DE KINDERMOORD

People complain about suggestions that the deaths in Wimbledon show why we need more restrictions on motorists/cars (how dare you abuse this for political purposes).

Yet the country with by far the most success on promoting cycling did it EXPLICITLY by protesting such deaths heavily...