Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Is it Desirable to **** up Traffic on Wightman?
Seen on Wightman today. Isn’t traffic disruption on Wightman just what was needed?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by andy thomas on
-
Your comment is absolutely spot-on! No-one *needs* a car in Greater London, the public transport system now is so good and if you need to shift something big and heavy, a ZipVan rented by the hour will do the job.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
like all generalisations - including this one - that is not true.
I am disabled and cannot walk from Wightman Rd even as far as Green Lanes or to my nearest bus stop on Turnpike Lane.
-
Permalink Reply by V&M on
-
I work in events, I use my car for work every day, moving either staff or props/equipment.
When the car broke down last week I booked Zipcars and Zipvans to replace it (at a hefty cost) and Zipcar froze the account because of 'unusually high activity', blocking all the bookings with no notice at all. Turned to Drivenow (whose vehicles are all tiny, so that was fun) and courier vans and had to pay even more £££ than I'd projected with Zipcar. It was an expensive, ineffective, unreliable and exhausting week. And I am a long term customer of both services.
I would love to swap to an electric/hybrid vehicle (and would happily pay a premium to do so), but unfortunately there aren't many estate options out there, and pretty much none in the second hand market. Short term hire vehicles are financially prohibitive if you use a vehicle every day and long term hire is just a more expensive form of ownership.
I don't expect the world to revolve around my needs, and I understand that it will be made less and less easy for me to work in this way, but I'm hoping for a tipping point where there is a genuinely feasible alternative either in the form of a cleaner vehicle I can own or an affordable short term hire option. In the meantime, I could live without blanket statements about whether I *need* a vehicle.
-
Permalink Reply by kotkas on
-
That's perfectly sensible and of course we all need our tradespeople, mail deliveries, and all sorts of commercial matters to work smoothly. I do hope you get the option to acquire an environmentally friendly vehicle and go about your business uninterrupted.
The issue many (including myself) are frustrated with is the 'civilian' population of drivers in London who in most cases could use public transport in a more convenient, faster, cheaper fashion than using their own vehicle. So yes, most Londoners could go about their day-to-day life more effectively via public transport.
-
-
Yes I still have a car, and yes it's the transport of last resort, not least since I have a Freedom Pass (how much longer will they exist, after the BBC licence fee change) and a decent knowledge of public transport.
-
-
My apologies, I should have said 'most private motorists' rather than 'no-one'; for every rule there's an exception(s) and although some people with reduced mobility use mini-cabs or Dial-a-Ride services for their transport needs, I agree this does not suit everyone all of the time. And of course, business & commercial users do need to use vehicles in the course of their work.
But it's the general sentiment of Geraldine's post I agree with. Harringay is not too bad in this respect compared with some other parts of London. If you go out to the Thirties Suburbia zones of London - Southgate, Romford, Hillingdon, Bexleyheath, Raynes Park, Morden, etc - there's mile upon mile of semis, each with their front gardens completely paved over and 4 or 5 cars (including new Mercs!) parked, many belonging to grown-up children having to still live with their parents and in some cases, a work van also parked there as well.
Why don't these households at least share some of the cars? They'd save a lot of money.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Completely agree about Thirties suburbia. Close at hand, Enfield is a prime example. Some of the roads really do feel like car parks. I really couldn't stand living in amongst that.
-
-
The dividing line seems to be around developments planned before & after the private car became routine - Harringay was planned & built before this, many of the outer boroughs (& new towns etc) came after. In the latter case the car becomes a dominant driver of how land is allocated, making everything further apart, hence making walking more difficult, and reducing the viability of public transport.
-
-
Do you think the UK is more car-dependent than most other developed countries? I can think of exceptions where significant interventions have enforced a less dependent culture, but in the main I'd have thought we're roughy similar to most other developed western countries.
The real changes are now coming in Asia. I've been travelling regularly to Malaysia for 15 years now. The rise in car ownership and car use there over that time has been unbelievable. KL has made a good start on its metro system, but at this stage it's not extensive enough to make much of a dent in car use. Whereas we happily drove into the centre of KL fifteen years ago; now I wouldn't at any time of day unless I really had to.
I think the change you observe in Harringay streets being turned into car parks is pretty much par for the course. The rise in UK car ownership since the 60s and 70s has changed the look and feel of our streets significantly. I'm sure its a shock if your memories weren't figuring it in.
I'm hoping that a future change might see personal city transport replacing single-household cars with something more shared. When I had to replace my car last year, I thought about not buying another. I'd have happily replaced it with something that I don't own or have unique access to but which would give me similar convenience. I decided that for me we're not quite at a point where car clubs, public transport or any combination of alternatives quite fills the gap.
Yes, I could do without a car, but having access to one adds a lot of convenience and extends my choice of activity, particularly outside London. I don't *need* a car, in the same way that I don't *need* a TV or *need* a washing machine or *need* holidays abroad. But I choose each one of those things because they add to the quality of my life. I accept that some people don't *need* a car, and make a choice not to have one. They make that decision believing that on balance their quality of life is better without one. I wonder how many do so for purely altruistic reasons.
For the time being, we can seek to encourage people to tip over to choosing alternatives to car ownership, but ultimately we need to allow people to make their own choices without berating them. I'd happily share a car with two or three neighbours. (Smart technology could aid the choice of sharing partner by analysing usage compatibility of neighbours: it could also enable hassle free, or reduced hassle sharing). That may come, but I think we have to accept that the pattern of ownership will only change slowly. In the meantime, we can encourage people towards more responsible car use both through gentle persuasion, financial incentives of various sorts and enabling the establishment of alternatives if and when they arise.
-
-
I hope for the same change - and I need to emphasise I don't think anyone is casting judgment on why Londoners need/or don't need cars.
There is evidence of clear market failure where individuals seem to be opting for more expensive, inconvenient options than the existing alternatives when it comes to commuting. I have considered also buying a car, but an electric one.
Given our usage, the economics of some combination of car rental, car club and public transport win by a very large margin - no matter whether you compare it to a Prius or a Tesla...
The extension of the ULEZ perimeter would be a great fix for this, as would be a higher tax regime on petrol vehicles registered within large urban areas where alternatives are abundant.
-
-
I'm glad to hear that a non-ownership option worked for you, proving that there are viable options for some.You obviously did the spadework in making a choice; others may just take the path of least resistance. I wonder how many more people would choose a non-ownership option if there were something to make the the job of choosing clearer - some kind of GLA, or central government owned online comparison and option generation system?
Good to hear that you're not making judgements on others' choices, but some are only too ready to do so.
-
Permalink Reply by JoeW on
-
Some kind of online cost comparison tool might be useful although it would need a much more complex decision tree than say changing your utility provider. I switched to non-car-ownership last year and since then have needed to decide for each journey whether to go by foot, bike, bus, train, DriveNow or conventional car hire. In many cases a combination of those. I'm not sure I could have plugged the costs and other factors behind those decisions into an online tool in advance. Non-ownership has been perfectly viable for me, but to properly quantify the cost effectiveness you'd have to somehow put a value on assets like your time, convenience, health etc. (Not to mention the externalities!)
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
