kernals12
Banned
But if it's only replacing revenue lost from declining gas taxes, then taxes on car ownership would remain much lower than in Holland or Denmark.
London Thinks Big
- Thread starter kernals12
- Start date
The number of cars in the Netherlands keeps increasing and is 8,5 million for 17 million habitants. We have excellent car, train and bicycle infrastructure at the same time. But we are with good reason reluctsnt to demolish historic buildings and thr little remaining nature for even more highways.
Mosr people I know who live in urban areas have a car but use it two times a week when it,s practical and commute by train or bus or bike and do their everyday shopping by bike and maybe once a week by car.
Meanwhile, I have family and friends in different countries and now at age 48 I can discern already health benefits fot people who cycle a lot mostly in the Netherlands compared to people who do everything by car.
so biking is very practical and doesnt have to be connected to the inability to buy a car, poverty or a radical anti car attitude.
London could use a lot more cycling, because its relatively flat and has a climate with few hot or cold extremes like much of northwestern Europe.
Last edited:
Devvy
Donor
From the UK Office for Budget Responsibility:
There were approx 2.5 million new cars registered last year. That means to cover just a 50% decrease in fuel taxes, you'd need to slap on approx £6,000 per new car registration. That will then drive new car purchases down, which will require the duty to go up to cover that lost income.
kernals12
Banned
That's not a lot of money, that's only a fraction of the price of a car. The taxes charged by Holland and Denmark are multiples of the price of a car.
Mmmm, not so much. Let's look at a fairly ordinary sort of car, a Toyota Prius. If you go look at Toyota's UK website here, you can find that they list the price of a new Prius as starting at about £27 000. Meanwhile, on their Dutch website they list the price as starting at about €33 000. Converting the latter figure into pounds sterling indicates that if British customers were charged the same amount they would be paying £28 000, only a £1 000 difference. Not only does this show that a £6 000 pound increase in per-car registration costs would, in fact, drastically increase the cost of some (and probably the vast majority) of new car purchases, but it also shows that Dutch and British car purchase prices are actually pretty similar, at least for Priuses. You could probably go through and do a similar analysis on other models and come up with similar results, but I don't want to spend that kind of time.
You can download the UK price list (as of the beginning of November 2019, so quite recent) here (I suspect there's something similar for the Dutch, but I don't know how to find it) and scroll down to page 14 to find that the UK price does indeed include taxes, in this case VAT; none of the models of the non-plug-in Prius (which is what we were looking at) cost anything like £27 000 without it. I would assume that the Dutch price does as well.
If Parliament is forced out of London, the B******s might end up near me.
Having been clipped by a cyclist blasting through a red light on lower Thames Street cycle super highway just this week I find the suggestions we combine pedestrian and cyclists in anyway worrying (especially in a pedway).....
I worked with Andrew Gilligan and TFL at the GLA on the entire project for a number of years (I was tasked to lie/invent/make up some economic benefits for London of more people cycling to work) I've always found the current urban planning obsession with "getting people onto bikes for their commute into zone 1" without merit or legitimacy to the tax payer.
The cycle superhighway network has been a disaster in the City, especially around Blackfriars (incl the bridge and down embankment).
Personally I would have shot a number of people at tfl years ago and started Crossrail/Liz Line services in a three station point to point shuttle as the priority rather than greater London priority (akin to wateredpoo and shitty line) and taken a huge burden off the legacy deep tube and busses for the commute into CoL.
Also I would have been utterly brutal about private vehicle access into the City 7am-7pm during the week.
Basically anything other than encouraging people onto bicycles. Londoners, especially those that work in The City, are already horrible bastards, putting them in lycra and on a £3000 carbon fibre death missile does not transform them into relaxed laughing Amsterdamers.
I worked with Andrew Gilligan and TFL at the GLA on the entire project for a number of years (I was tasked to lie/invent/make up some economic benefits for London of more people cycling to work) I've always found the current urban planning obsession with "getting people onto bikes for their commute into zone 1" without merit or legitimacy to the tax payer.
The cycle superhighway network has been a disaster in the City, especially around Blackfriars (incl the bridge and down embankment).
Personally I would have shot a number of people at tfl years ago and started Crossrail/Liz Line services in a three station point to point shuttle as the priority rather than greater London priority (akin to wateredpoo and shitty line) and taken a huge burden off the legacy deep tube and busses for the commute into CoL.
Also I would have been utterly brutal about private vehicle access into the City 7am-7pm during the week.
Basically anything other than encouraging people onto bicycles. Londoners, especially those that work in The City, are already horrible bastards, putting them in lycra and on a £3000 carbon fibre death missile does not transform them into relaxed laughing Amsterdamers.
Interesting. So what are the mistakes and dangers of increasing the number of cyclists? Are these in your view specific problems for London or universal failures of city planning?
I would say it's unique to London because it's not an alternative mass transit system for time sensitive financial services work. You don't need it in Singapore, Tokyo and HK because the public transport is so good and I can't see it ever being option in the USA. There's no European equiv megacity or super centre.
One of the big lies I had to make in behalf of TFL was that cycling is an acceptable method for executives to get into work in the Hague/Amsterdam. It wasn't. The more Amsterdam, especially, tried to boost capital markets facing activity it has to boost suburb to CBD roadway and light transit capacity.
Trying to explain to ukgov that wanky cafe jobs, art galleries, tourism and high end public sector jobs are not the same as trying to run a huge banking sector usually fell on deaf ears because they just just did equiv job code analysis (pay to pay or grad work is grad work).
TL;Dr You can't run the world's largest financial services district (in some elements) with cycling being a relevant part of the mix. It's policy fluff everyone decided to take seriously because you can make quick policy wins with.
One of the big lies I had to make in behalf of TFL was that cycling is an acceptable method for executives to get into work in the Hague/Amsterdam. It wasn't. The more Amsterdam, especially, tried to boost capital markets facing activity it has to boost suburb to CBD roadway and light transit capacity.
Trying to explain to ukgov that wanky cafe jobs, art galleries, tourism and high end public sector jobs are not the same as trying to run a huge banking sector usually fell on deaf ears because they just just did equiv job code analysis (pay to pay or grad work is grad work).
TL;Dr You can't run the world's largest financial services district (in some elements) with cycling being a relevant part of the mix. It's policy fluff everyone decided to take seriously because you can make quick policy wins with.
Last edited:
A new update to the London Ringways that explores the Northern radials, one of which includes a non-official proposal to improve the existing A12 (akin to the modern A3 Kingston Bypass had it gone ahead) with a double-deck Y-shaped flyover at Gants Hill that also links up with a nearby branch of the North Circular Road. - https://www.roads.org.uk/ringways/northern
Last edited:
A proposal for a tunnel to replace Tower Bridge, with the tunnel possibly running from Jamaica Road in the south to Thomas More Street on the north side had it been built. - https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2020/04/08/unbuilt-london-replacing-tower-bridge-with-a-tunnel/
IMHO it would have been interesting seeing an ATL tunnel existing alongside the OTL Tower Bridge (that was upgraded and the bridge road sections strengthened albeit still with a weight and speed limit up to the present), since the tunnel was to be located a quite a bit away from the bridge or a similarly updated version of the Crystal Tower Bridge proposal by W.F.C Holden (1943).
IMHO it would have been interesting seeing an ATL tunnel existing alongside the OTL Tower Bridge (that was upgraded and the bridge road sections strengthened albeit still with a weight and speed limit up to the present), since the tunnel was to be located a quite a bit away from the bridge or a similarly updated version of the Crystal Tower Bridge proposal by W.F.C Holden (1943).
MSG Sphere London in Stratford is a proposed music and entertainment venue - https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2019/03/27/giant-black-sphere-coming-to-stratford/
Are architects blind?
This is, if anything, worse than that absurd crystal pyramid at The Louvre. Can they show some sense of harmony with surroundings?IMO, the Thames tunnel is a good idea. I'd take the bascule to its max height & lock it, then remove the elevating gear & turn the bascule into a bike-only crossing, leaving the upper deck for pedestrians only (providing the conversion could be done without radically altering the appearance of the bridge). In any event, I'd lock the bascule raised & remove; the tunnel, with adequate capacity, should make it moot. (Removing the bascule entirely, if needed, is an option.)
Are architects blind?
Only a fan of its possible function if it gets built, not so much the building itself.
The following is a 1960s proposal by Sir Leslie Martin for a Brutalist revamp of Whitehall (reminiscent of the Southbank), though not sure how they would mesh or even be considered in an ATL where the Imperial Monument Halls and Tower are built.
A map of London's Unbuilt Monorail, more at following link. - https://notquitetangible.blogspot.com/2020/05/londons-unbuilt-monorail.html
New Buckingham Palace scheme 1910s - https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2020/06/24/unbuilt-london-the-new-buckingham-palace/
Central London Rail Study 1989 (PDF) - Highlights Include:
- https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoT_CentralLondonRailStudy1989.pdf
- North-South Crossrail
- East-West Crossrail
- City Crossrail
- Chelsea-Hackney Tube Line
- Jubilee Line proposed extension to Ilford from Charing Cross via Liverpool Street and Whitechapel
- Central Line to Richmond from Shepherds Bush via Turnham Green (possibly via Goldhawk Road) by a takeover of the District Line's Richmond Branch, which is essentially a recent version of an earlier Central extension to Richmond.
- Bakerloo Line takeover of the Central Line's Ealing Broadway Branch from Queens Park via North Acton (with a possible stop at Old Oak Common) as well as a Bakerloo Line southern extension from Elephant & Castle to Lewisham, Croydon and Crystal Palace.
- What appears to be an overlapping Victoria line scheme between Victoria and King's Cross to presumably increase capacity on the line in the core section.
- Thameslink Metro
- Docklands Second Line from Waterloo to Westcombe Park, seems to be the OTL Waterloo Greenwich Railway part of which was utilized by the OTL Jubilee Line rather than an actual Docklands Light Railway route.
- https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoT_CentralLondonRailStudy1989.pdf
Last edited: