this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
256 points (98.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

9628 readers
805 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Everyone likes low traffic neighborhoods, but the fact is they’re mostly going to be in rich areas. By definition property values will be lower in high traffic areas and getting enough political power to turn your area into a low traffic area will probably require money and influence. Around me all the wealthy streets have speed bumps installed. I couldn’t picture a poor street getting the same from the city.

[–] rosamundi@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

I live in one of the most deprived London boroughs. The council is installing LTNs, school streets, and a borough-wide 20mph limit. Many of the existing housing estates are already LTNs, but because that's how the estate was built, people don't recognise it as an LTN, it's just the estate.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 7 points 8 months ago

People often say this but there isn't the slightest bit of evidence to back it up beyond statements like your 'I couldn't picture a poor street' etc., which is no kind of evidence at all. I can picture 'poor streets' getting the same, so where does that leave us?

What's more, there's plenty of evidence to the contrary. Most council estates were built on what we would now call LTN principles: you can drive into them but not through them, the roads, junctions and crossings are narrow, to discourage speeding and make it quicker and easier for pedestrians to cross, and the speed limits are set low, etc. It's possible that many of the new LTNs are being installed in wealthier neighbourhoods simply because the poorer neighbourhoods already are effectively LTNs. And, in any case, why should being wealthy mean you shouldn't get to breathe clean air?

Having said that, some of the most extensive new LTNs have been built in Newham and Tower Hamlets (where the mayor is trying to take them out despite their popularity), which are two of the poorest boroughs in London. As the article points out, most LTNs have been installed by Labour councils, which tend to be in the poorer areas. It strikes me as unlikely that the poorest councils have all decided to install LTNs exclusively in the richer enclaves.

More broadly, LEZ and ULEZ were initially rolled out in the inner city: where poorer people tend to live. So, your argument just doesn't hold up at all.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

It's vice versa. There are plenty of new car free developments in poorer parts of London like Barking, but you'll never see them in rich parts like Chelsea.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Yeah i grew up next to a very deprived council estate in the 90s, they already had speed bumps in place then. Your take is nonsense.