Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

245RE: [WorldTransport Forum] environment award

Expand Messages
  • Wetzel Dave
    Apr 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Like Athens, London has a long way to go before pedestrians are given equal
      treatment to cars.
      However, our Mayor, Ken Livingstone, has made a start. More time for
      pedestrians at traffic light controlled crossings and he has pedestrianised the North side of Trafalgar Square close to the National Gallery art
      exhibition. This has controversially reduced traffic capacity by some 20%.
      Currently, there is a delay for buses and taxis but I expect the long term
      effect will be that many vehicles will avoid the Square altogether and use
      alternative routes - thus easing the pinch-point congestion created.

      We saw a similar effect in the 1980s when I was Chair of the Greater London
      Council's Transport Committee and we introduced many new traffic schemes
      which reduced capacity - not least new traffic signals at Hyde Park Corner
      which cut the traffic capacity but also dramatically reduced road accidents.
      The press berated us for weeks but it did eventually settle down and today
      nobody would dare suggest we remove the traffic signals.

      You can find TfL's cycling action plan on:
      http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/pdfdocs/cycling/cycling-action-plan.pdf

      and TfL's pedestrian plan on:
      http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/downloads/pdf/walking-plan-2004.pdf

      Dave

      "Solvitur Ambulans"
      Dave Wetzel; Vice-Chair; Transport for London.
      Windsor House. 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK
      Tel: 020 7941 4200
      Windsor House is close to New Scotland Yard. Buses 11, 24, 148, 211 and
      N11 pass the door.
      Nearest Tube: St. James's Park Underground station.
      Nearest mainline stations: Waterloo and Victoria (Both a short walk or
      bus ride).




      -----Original Message-----
      From: K Tsourlakis [mailto:ktsou@...]
      Sent: 31 March 2004 21:25
      To: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [WorldTransport Forum] environment award



      Yes, I am already aware of it - this has already been widely known and
      advertised (it would be interesting to be also known the exact schemes and projects financed through these resourses). And this is indeed a very good use for the money collected. However good treatment of pedestrians and
      bicyclists (unlike motorised traffic) does not really need large sums of
      money but the determination to slow down (or even better completely remove) motorised traffic and dispose the urban space to them. Does London mayor intends to limit space allocated for motorised traffic and turn it into
      pedestrian and bicycle space? In what extent (% of urban space)?
      BTW I don't know what you exactly mean by "BEING REALLY BADLY TREATED" but if you want to see a really barbarous treatment of pedestrians and
      bicyclists take a look at: http://www.pezh.gr/english/intro_en.htm
      thanks and regards
      K.Tsourlakis



      At 07:50 ìì 30/3/2004 +0200, you wrote:
      >DEAR K TSOURLAKIS
      >PLEASE BE INFORMED THAT AS PART OF THE LONDON CONGESTION CHARGE PROJECT, >THE 20 % REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC VOLUME ACHIEVED IS GOING TO BE USED TO
      >IMPROVE CONDITIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS IN LONDON.(WHO ARE
      >PRESENTLY BEING REALLY BADLY TREATED)
      >THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN "TOWARDS A FINE CITY FOR PEOPLE" MADE BY
      >GEHL-ARCHITECTS-URBAN QUALITY CONSULTANTS IN COPENHAGEN WILL BE LAUNCHED >JUST AFTER THE MAYORAL ELECTION 10 JUNE 2004.
      >Warm greetings from
      >sincerely yours
      >
      >Jan Gehl
      >Professor of Urban Design
      >Copenhagen
      >Denmark
      >
      >
      >Den 29/3-2004, kl. 23.18, skrev K Tsourlakis:
      >
      >>The justification for the charge (at least according to its name) is not
      >>that cars pollute, embarrass and kill pedestrians, and destroy the city,
      >>but that they congest, i.e. they embarrass other cars and deter them to
      run
      >>faster. This must also be the reason why, as far as I know, motorcycles
      are
      >>exempted from the charge. So, the message sent to the public opinion seems
      >>to be "pay in order to drive better and faster" and not "do not drive". It
      >>would be much better if its name were "pollution charge" or (even more
      >>accurately) "motorised traffic damage charge" and this reason were used to
      >>justify it to the public opinion. High technology is not so important for
      >>the control of the motorised traffic, as is the determination to withstand
      >>pressures from organised interests and the proper informing and education
      >>of the general public, which will facilitate this determination. For
      >>instance, bus lanes or parking restrictions could equally well (or even
      >>better in some cases) serve the purpose of limiting motorised traffic. I
      >>think "congestion charge" is not promoted in the best way to educate the
      >>general public for the damages provoked by motorised traffic and the huge
      >>(though mostly hidden) subsidies connected with it. Finally note that I am
      >>not among "the two dissenters" but, although I consider it as a positive
      >>initiative, I am very sceptical about its importance and in any case I
      >>consider it overrated.




      The Journal of World Transport Policy and Practice
      Consult at: http://wTransport.org
      To post message to group: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com
      To subscribe: WorldTransport-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      To unsubscribe: WorldTransport-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      Yahoo! Groups Links






      ***********************************************************************************
      The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.

      If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster@....

      This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
      ***********************************************************************************
    • Show all 9 messages in this topic