Forum Topics

Car Use, Climate Change, Carbon Footprint

Another walk to drop off the kids and I was thinking about personal choice and climate change.  I’m guessing most of the people who post on here are from around Chiswick.  So are probably in work, middle class and financially ok (I know not everyone will fit into the category).  Being in this position gives us more choice.  Where we live, what schools our children go to, where we shop, how we shop etc.So many of us can choose not to use a car, but walk, bike etc. and it makes little difference to our day-to-day life.  In fact, walking and cycling does us good and it helps reduce pollution.  But obviously not everyone is in this position, they don’t have the easy choice to drop the car.So, what is our own personal carbon footprint.  Is the car the biggest factor?  For the last couple of years, mine has been small.  But I’m guessing it will go up soon when I start to travel out of the country for work.  Would I be prepared to change job to reduce that?  Honestly, no.Ed, sorry single you out but I think you are the only person who has talked about his company with David on here.  I believe that most if not all your business is done via mail/internet order/delivery and that you have no high street presence (Sorry if I have got that wrong).  But would you be prepared to get a shop and stop all deliveries, or even change your line of work to reduce your own carbon footprint?  I’m guessing like me the answer would be “no” as It’s a difficult and life changing decision.My point is just because it is easy for us to reduce car use, it isn’t for everyone.  We should all try to listen to the other side of the argument.  Also to one person in particular, stop trolling everyone that has a different opinion to you.

Kieran Fox ● 1865d16 Comments ● 1858d

SoGA & GPG Traffic  Proposal

SOUTH CHISWICK LIVEABLE NEIGHBOURHOOD (SCLN) Update URGENT: There is time sensitivity if you wish to contribute to the SCLN discussion as set out below. The Strand on the Green Association (SoGA) and The Grove Park Group (GPG) have been working together with other local stakeholder groups to develop an alternative proposal to London Borough of Hounslow’s (LBH) current implementation of the South Chiswick Liveable Neighbourhood (SCLN) scheme as part of its Streetspace trials. We support the stated aims of the SCLN, to reduce through-traffic, improve environment and safety, which is the view of a majority of our members. We wish to see the implementation of the SCLN improved, and a consultation to further explore resident views. We do not wish to see the SCLN abandoned but note that a majority of residents are opposed in its current form.In early August we engaged with lead Councillors Khan, Dunne and Lambert who were initially supportive of our alternative proposal, to have common traffic measures controlled by up to 9 APNR timed cameras within the area stretching from Hogarth Roundabout to Chiswick & Kew Bridges bounded by the A4 to the north and the A316 (see map below). Access is controlled through a timed measure via ANPR cameras, effectively aimed at removing through-traffic, but allowing access to anybody using Grove Park’s services, such as doctors and schools also for entry of taxi or delivery vehicles.During mid-August we were introduced by these Councillors to Jefferson Nwokeoma at LBH Traffic who dismissed our proposal out of hand, did not engage on the specifics and would not consider any workable alternatives. In particular, the significantly increased traffic seen on Burlington Lane and Sutton Court Road which he again described as being ‘a cost of the scheme’ and thus inequitably impacting Grove Park residents.  As part of this dialogue LBH Traffic told us about four proposed changes to the SCLN which we communicated to members. We raised practical challenges and alternatives to three of these. Thankfully it seems none of these additional and disruptive measures are to be implemented.Reading LBH’s Streetspace Review announced on 27 August we found that the trial measures in Grove Park have largely been made permanent. This decision has been made despite significant negative feedback from residents through consultation, which was a flawed process as it provided no traffic data to consider the impact of the trial measures, nor did it explain the trial measures selected or alternatives considered. Study of LBH’s further announcement on 1 September revealed that new measures were planned to provide a hard block to Burlington Lane from the A316 and an increase to the school hours in Staveley Road off the A316. This was designed to further reduce the through-traffic, but is ill-conceived in implementation, acting to the detriment of the adjacent residents who would not be able to access Grove Park without having to divert via Hogarth Roundabout and enter via Sutton Court Road.  We support measures to reduce the through-traffic which has now been inequitably displaced across the area and LBH have clearly changed their position after listening to both our proposals and residents’ concerns. However, the practicalities of these additional disjointed piecemeal and ill-considered measures across the area effectively cut off Grove Park to residents crossing the A316. If LBH were to engage constructively with our alternative proposal and their own proposed changes these flaws would have been immediately obvious. The validity of these measures is to be questioned through an upcoming LBH Overview & Scrutiny Call in Sub Committee (OSC) at 19:00 on Thursday 23 September. The challenges raised by local Councillors are focused on lack of consultation, inadequate data and impact on local cohesion; the relevant document is here:https://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=693&MId=12447We understand that residents are planning to attend a demonstration at LBH’s offices. Should members wish to join this it will be at 18:00 on Thursday 23 September outside the LBH offices at Hounslow House 7 Bath Road TW3 3EB. Alternatively, and prior to the OSC meeting this Thursday, residents are encouraged to email the following Councillor: daanish.saeed@hounslow.gov.uk who will be chairing the OSC sub-committee to make their dissatisfaction to the current traffic measures known and to add their support for the APNR proposal as a workable alternative.The APNR timed camera proposal tabled by SoGA and GPG with other stakeholder groups is a workable option for delivering the SCLN in-line with Government policy for Low Traffic Neighbourhood schemes. Collectively we remain open to discussing further proposals and amendments from LBH, from local residents and from broader stakeholders. Our stated aim is for ours and any other schemes to be discussed by all interested parties through consultation. The link for further information on LBH’s Streetspace Review, which includes the SCLN is here: https://www.hounslow.gov.uk/info/20053/transport/2171/hounslows_streetspace/9Your support is necessary, so please forward this email to friends and neighbours who may not be members of the relevant groups and take the time to email Cllr Daanish Saeed with your comments ahead of Thursday 23 September.MapDescription automatically generated

Strand on the Green Association ● 1861d35 Comments ● 1859d

The Liberation of Paris from Cars is Working

https://slate.com/business/2021/09/paris-cars-bicycles-walking-david-belliard-anne-hidalgo.htmlWhen you're accustomed to privilege equality feels like oppression:"The redistribution of public space is a policy of social redistribution. Fifty percent of public space is occupied by private cars, which are used mostly by the richest, and mostly by men, because it’s mostly men who drive, and so in total, the richest men are using half the public space. So if we give the space to walking, biking, and public transit, you give back public space to the categories of people who today are deprived.""In the U.S., for projects that prioritize pedestrians, a lot of the opposition comes from small business. Have you tried to convince them that this is in their interest?It’s counterintuitive. A lot of them believe they’re going to lose business because there will be less traffic. All the figures show the opposite. Every time we do experiments, we see that first, a big majority of their clients don’t use a car to come to their place, and then, people who use bikes and on foot consume more than people in cars. So really, what we’re trying to do is not convince, but argue by proving it, showing that it works.""Are you suggesting there’s something in these anti-car politics that could be attractive even to someone who supports the gilets jaunes, the yellow-vest protesters who took over French cities two years ago?The gilets jaunes is what? People saying, “We’ve had enough of gas prices going up.” Frankly they’re right. When I was in Vesoul, I was obliged to have a car, the car was not an object of emancipation but of servitude. I could do nothing without my car. So evidently, we are asking them to pay ever more for something they are required to use."

Paul Campbell ● 1862d8 Comments ● 1861d