Nice - price motorists off the roads

[El Cid]

55 minutes ago, tzijlstra said:

So what you are saying is that fees to enter certain parts of the infrastructure are acceptable? Like an emissions tax in Sheffield City Centre? I'm not averse to the idea, but it has to be combined with better infrastructure for non-car traffic.

 

I am in favour of the principle, but I feel it needs to be coordinated nationally. I feel Government are forcing councils to do it because it may be unpopular.

Will all the big cities having these clean air tolls have the same rules? Buying a EURO 5/6 car thinking its ok, then driving to another city, only to suffer a heavy toll.

[ads36]

5 hours ago, iansheff said:

 

It is all stick with these groups,  they think that charging people things like congestion charges and sugar taxes will solve the problems whilst hoping they won't because it just gives more money to the government. Or am I just being cynical?

 

 Cynical and wrong.

 

the focus of the draft NICE proposals is very much on the benefits of improving walking and cycle routes.

 

exercise is good for us, we don't do enough. There are simple things we can do, by copying street design features from other western / European cities that are proven to work.

 

with good enough not-car options, more people may decide they don't need their 2nd or 3rd cars. And that'll free up millions, that's currently spent on loans, insurance, and fuel.

 

if people feel safe to cycle occasionally, that'll mean fewer cars on the roads, e.g. Capacity is freed up. if you think creating safe attractive walking and cycle routes sounds expensive, wait till you hear how much it'll cost to 'simply' increase transport capacity by building more roads/adding more lanes.

 

better routes for active travel is all win, and if you still need to drive, to shift the ubiquitous wardrobe, there will be fewer cars on the road.

 

 

 

[Afilsdesigne]

When I first started work, travel was by subsidised bus and cost 9p if I remember correctly. The buses were packed, ran on time and were quite reliable though low tech and overcrowded. I for one wasn't keen on bus fares being subsidised by the ratepayer but will concede some decades later that I was wrong. If the model had been properly funded, people would have continued to use public transport as it was far cheaper than car ownership, especially if the system had been expanded, improved and made better. Now we have clogged roads, bad air, frustrated drivers and hardly any joined up public transport with little prospect of anything changing the dynamic. Yet we can plainly see the projection of what we currently have leading to total gridlock. We need a viable alternative and fast.

 

With a rising (and ageing) population, car ownership, especially in the cities is going to become non-viable through gridlock rising costs and pollution. With the rise of Internet shopping, delivery vans are going to choke the roads even more. We need a completely different model and we need it installed before the Nice principles arrive by default as they surely will. The only truly sustainable transport models are the bicycle, Horse and two legs. So what can we do to have minimal impact? 

 

It seems to me the only viable 'solution' to any of this is a truly modern public transport system that gets you from A to B quickly, cheaply and safely. whilst having minimal environmental impact With an ageing population, simplicity is a requirement too. How to do this in our already overcrowded and busy cities is a real challenge and one that demands a high tech modern solution.

 

After polishing up the crystal ball, the obvious 'solution' is personalised one or two seat electric vehicles (mobility scooter derivative possibly) that integrate into a skyTran derivative (NASA design) to give true high speed door to door travel, even for the elderly.  Given a sufficiently large network and overseen by AI this could revolutionise travel and would fit, relatively inexpensively, into the most congested places. Being a suspended monorail it will be weatherproof, not to mention union proof. Small electric vehicles travelling to and from access points on the network could transform our roads and, depending on cost, radically transform air quality, especially if these networks were used at night for transporting goods around. Anything remotely resembling this is decades away though, so, gridlock it is!    

[Baron99]

5 hours ago, tzijlstra said:

Last Christmas I spent time in my native Netherlands. In a medium sized city. Car ownership is far more expensive in the Netherlands than it is here. The entire infrastructure is based on cyclists and pedestrians, in particular in city centres. 

 

Result: The Dutch 'exercise' twice as much as almost any other EU nation. In fact, the number of 'inactives' ie. those not reaching  targets (moderate activity, lasting 30 minutes, five times a week), in the Netherlands is 18,2 %, compared to the UK at 63.3 % - let that difference sink in for a second... Even the Americans have considerably fewer inactives at 40.5 % according to these measures.

 

Personally I was most definitely part of that 63,3 % - but since actively aiming to improve my health I have not only lost 3 stone in weight, I am considerably more fit and generally happier with myself. All I've changed is that I leave the car more often and actually go for walks on a regular basis.

 

I don't approve of over-taxing cars, but I would most definitely welcome a complete change in the way infrastructure in the UK is designed. More dedicated cycle lanes and footpaths, better junction designs where pedestrians and cyclists are priority rather than afterthought. Better laws to protect cyclists and pedestrians in traffic.

And you've hit the nail on the head, as I've highlighted in bold in your comments.  You took responsibility for your own health; you take more exercise by walking regularly.  NICE seem to be drawing a correlation that those owning a car somewhow results in obesity or stopping those who don't own a car from being able to get their fat backsides out of the house to take exercise.  I'm of an age where growning up my parents didn't own a car & I didn't get one until my early 30's so it was either the bus, (taxis were a luxury) or walk. 

 

The bit about the Dutch taking more exercise than the British.  Let's see the official info on this one or I'll have to call you out on this point. 

 

Latest official info I can find from the EU is that the Nordic nations spend the most time exercising with the UK being above the EU average.  Strangely Holland & Belgium data isn't available. 

 

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20170302-1

 

So come on proved us all with the evidence that the Dutch out exercise the UK,  rather than hearsay or us taking your word for it? 

Edited January 5, 2019 by Baron99
Amendments

[tzijlstra]

37 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

And you've hit the nail on the head, as I've highlighted in bold in your comments.  You took responsibility for your own health; you take more exercise by walking regularly.  NICE seem to be drawing a correlation that those owning a car somewhow results in obesity or stopping those who don't own a car from being able to get their fat backsides out of the house to take exercise.  I'm of an age where growning up my parents didn't own a car & I didn't get one until my early 30's so it was either the bus, (taxis were a luxury) or walk. 

 

The bit about the Dutch taking more exercise than the British.  Let's see the official info on this one or I'll have to call you out on this point. 

 

Latest official info I can find from the EU is that the Nordic nations spend the most time exercising with the UK being above the EU average.  Strangely Holland & Belgium data isn't available. 

 

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/DDN-20170302-1

 

So come on proved us all with the evidence that the Dutch out exercise the UK,  rather than hearsay or us taking your word for it? 

Check the embedded link?

[Penistone999]

5 hours ago, tzijlstra said:

So what you are saying is that fees to enter certain parts of the infrastructure are acceptable? Like an emissions tax in Sheffield City Centre? I'm not averse to the idea, but it has to be combined with better infrastructure for non-car traffic.

 

Edit - cities in the NL see far fewer cars on the road, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy - force people out of cars and into using alternative transport (preferably self-powered) and keep improving the infrastructure for the benefit of those alternate modes. Oslo recently announced the entire City Centre will be made car-free. Having been there a few months ago - it is easy to achieve. It practically is car-free already.

Sheffield council have been doing this for years with their barmy road system, bus gates ,tram gates, one way streets 

[tzijlstra]

3 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

Sheffield council have been doing this for years with their barmy road system, bus gates ,tram gates, one way streets 

No they haven’t, one could argue that they made life for motorists more difficult, but never that they made it better for other road users.

[Longcol]

10 hours ago, tzijlstra said:

Last Christmas I spent time in my native Netherlands. In a medium sized city. Car ownership is far more expensive in the Netherlands than it is here. The entire infrastructure is based on cyclists and pedestrians, in particular in city centres. 

 

Result: The Dutch 'exercise' twice as much as almost any other EU nation. In fact, the number of 'inactives' ie. those not reaching  targets (moderate activity, lasting 30 minutes, five times a week), in the Netherlands is 18,2 %, compared to the UK at 63.3 % - let that difference sink in for a second... Even the Americans have considerably fewer inactives at 40.5 % according to these measures.

 

Personally I was most definitely part of that 63,3 % - but since actively aiming to improve my health I have not only lost 3 stone in weight, I am considerably more fit and generally happier with myself. All I've changed is that I leave the car more often and actually go for walks on a regular basis.

 

I don't approve of over-taxing cars, but I would most definitely welcome a complete change in the way infrastructure in the UK is designed. More dedicated cycle lanes and footpaths, better junction designs where pedestrians and cyclists are priority rather than afterthought. Better laws to protect cyclists and pedestrians in traffic.

Perhaps they should start levelling the hills in Sheffield to make it as flat as the Netherlands - that would make cycling and walking a lot easier.

[Longcol]

4 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

Sheffield council have been doing this for years with their barmy road system, bus gates ,tram gates, one way streets 

Thousands of people have no trouble driving into the city centre every day - summat wrong with your driving ability I reckon.

[tzijlstra]

7 hours ago, Longcol said:

Perhaps they should start levelling the hills in Sheffield to make it as flat as the Netherlands - that would make cycling and walking a lot easier.

Pergaps they shouldn’t and then people from Sheffield can be the fittest ever?