Devonshire Road closed at junction with A205

devonshire-rd

#83

Of course people on Devonshire Rd would want it closed off or a “study done” because it would significantly increase the value of their property.

There seems to be no glaring need to change the traffic conditions in the area given the limited alternative options available. It’s like buying a cheap property next to a bus stop then asking for the bus stop to be moved 50m down the road.

There was a consultation done last year? To introduce parking permits to roads like Devonshire Rd (which surely would have reduced some of the madness) and I believe there was not enough interest from residents to proceed.


#84

Really? If you are rich enough to be able to afford and run a car, is your life really a misery?

Car owners comprise less than half the population, yet contribute disproportionately to pollution. They of course do pay a little tax depending on the amount of pollution they cause, but they dish out that pollution to all other users of the roads (including themselves) as well as noise, and death, injury and damage through misuse.

According to the government, cars are responsible for 29,000 deaths a year (see http://www.dft.gov.uk/vca/fcb/cars-and-air-pollution.asp) so the less on the road, the better for everyone. The idea behind making it more difficult to travel through urban areas by car (like closing a junction on Devonshire Road) is to encourage people to seek other forms of transport. There are plenty of options in London.

If there is such a thing as this anti-car movement you speak of, they should be applauded for trying to save lives of young and old, and improve lives of others.

This doesn’t mean we should stop buying things online (or at all), but that we should think about why we are driving to the park, the shops, or (bizarrely) the gym. Only two out of five short journeys (under 5 miles) are currently made by foot, bike or public transport.

If people can’t rationally come to the conclusion that they are killing others by getting in their car, then it should be more difficult for them to do so. Closing junctions is one way of achieving this.


#85

And surely therefore local journeys would be much more pleasant (whether on bikes / cars / whatever)?

Surely emissions are responsible - the choices people make, rather than the things they buy. The issue Chris highlights is that in seeking to reduce car use, rather than offering better alternatives, we frequently see things to make car use more unpleasant - speed humps, light sequencing, charges. It’s all carrot and no stick, and in slowing journeys down you increase pollution (until you get to a critical point where car use reduces - which we haven’t seen yet in the UK).


#86

This is nothing to do with property values. Frankly, if a high value was anyone’s objective, they are doing fine as they are!

The issue here is a considerable worsening condition re traffic over a number of years, so bus stop analogy is not applicable.

Consultation, of which there have been a couple but most recent applied to Forest Hill end of DR, was to do with parking and CPZ. This is of scant relevance to through traffic, except that if there was less parking there would likely be more traffic as there would be more places to pass.


#87

Do you have any evidence for this? I lived on Devonshire Road from 2001-2004 and it didn’t seem any better then. The biggest difference was that there was more parking on the pavement at the HOP end of the road.


#88

They are partly responsible, but even the particulates created from braking (so this includes electric cars) cause or increase respiratory illness.

This is not really true. It depends hugely on the driver and the car they are driving - however no car = no pollution, and as you seem to agree - the point is to slow journeys down so much that other forms of transport are more attractive. However attractive it may appear right now - for most people, riding a bike, walking or taking public transport is already faster than driving a car for short trips. Maybe the mythical anti-car millionaires should be telling people that, or maybe the drivers are not listening?


#89

We should definitely get rid of the humps then!

What about people that depend on their own vehicles for carrying heavy loads (tools / goods / shopping etc)?

It’s great that some people like riding bikes / walking / bussing in London. Seems a bit arrogant for bike riders, walkers or bus users to tell everyone else how they’re allowed to travel :frowning:


#90

Blocking off both sides of Devonshire Road or making it a one-way route on both sides, would be ideal. We didn’t have much of a bottleneck when cars could park on the pavement, which we’d been able to do since time immemorial, but Lewisham Council had other ideas.


#91

No “bike riders” are though are they Chris at least not here - bit of a straw man. I ride a bike (and drive, walk, bus, tube and train) and couldn’t give a monkeys how people travel. I think it is more Government, both local and national policy, to reduce car journeys. Even if bike riders were telling other people how to travel then are we not all grown up enough to ignore them?


#92

This reduces the decision on whether to drive yourself or do something else down to time. It’s obviously more than that.


#93

Have edited my comment - I wasn’t intentionally singling out bike riders - point applied equally to walkers or bus users.


#94

I don’t think that is the case. Of course there is stick - no doubt about that and I applaud it. However there is some carrot.
For example there are tax benefits for electric or low polluting cars.
You can buy a bike on the cycle to work scheme and you don’t pay tax on most of the cost.
Increased infrastructure to make cycling safer and encourage more use.
Massive investment in things like cross rail and our very own East London line to give faster/alternative travel options.
Single price bus tickets anywhere and easy tap and go payments.
GPS enabled buses making them more attractive to get.
Smart Traffic control (albeit in its infancy)

I am sure there are others but extremely tired!

So I cycle to work - I got a decent bike on the ride to work scheme which saved me money. I ride in the bus lanes which keeps me a bit safe but I still drive to the shops. I’ll take that stick.


#95

or indeed drivers - or as they are more commonly called - people! :grinning:


#96

The OP is complaining about cars passing his house - not emissions. I do take your point, though I think this is about traffic and congestion rather than the damage that causes.

And let’s remember (and this is a tangent) that the government has spent a long time promoting diesel cars with tax incentives, and that’s proved to be daft.


#97

Last year my car was Road Tax Exempt, not this year as the goal posts have moved. My once bunny kissing tree hugging Volvo is now a kitten killer in the eyes of the DVLA.


#98

Why is it obvious?

Many people don’t own cars, yet still manage to transport themselves to local amenities. Not all -but most- people can manage a mile or so under their own steam


#99

Hi Yoms, I’m not sure I understand your proposal, please could you elaborate?

I’m sorry you think this is about money


#100

Without addressing specific comments, I want to share some notes from a talk by Claire Sheffield from TfL given at a seminar on urban transportation at the Ecobuild conference in London in June.

Reducing road use by private vehicles has been an objective of all three Mayors of London and there has been significant success. Car mode share has from from 48% to 37% of all road journeys since 2000. So clearly efforts of which traffic calming have been successful as has the congestion charge, re-allocation of road space and investment in alternatives (Boris Bikes included). There has been some natural decline as there is also a national decline in drivers licences among young people particularly in London.

TfL recognise that 1/3rd of car journeys are completely unavoidable. It is the other 2/3rd that they want to encourage of the road, or onto the roads at different times. And it makes sense. Ms. Sheffield noted that cars, taxis and minicabs take up half of the road space but carry only 1/5th of the passengers. Sure a lot of people need to use a car. Many more do not, or could use alternative forms.

By the way, those on Devonshire Road should be delighted that the new Mayor is planning more and more road closures to through traffic.


#101

To clarify, @comoed said “… for most people, riding a bike, walking or taking public transport is already faster than driving a car for short trips…” and my reply was trying to say that whether to use a car or not isn’t just about what’s going to be fastest. Personally, when I use a car I know in London that it’s generally going to take longer than the public transport alternative but other factors are at play (perhaps I want to transport something large or heavy, or don’t want to take two kids on the bus, or try to walk a mile with a pre-schooler).

I was trying to make it clear that speed isn’t the only decision factor.


#102

My point addresses both sides of the argument. We have major congestion at the Honor Oak end of Devonshire Road. This is partially because the council decided to ticket all the cars parked on the pavement, and now the road is not wide enough to fit two vehicles. Blocking off the other end of Devonshire hasn’t made things any easier.

The congestion has led to an increase in air pollution (I’m asthmatic and my attacks have increased as a result), noise pollution as tempers flare and drivers start blasting car horn, we even have the occasional fight.

Blocking off the road at either end or turning either side into a one way system could help reduce traffic, and give residents a better quality of life.

Talking about control parking zones, etc is missing the point. It is the amount of traffic using the road that’s the main issue, and NOT parked cars!