Ban Private Cars in London)
I welcome the new London Plan emphasis on Good Growth; of a healthy, inclusive city and its determination to limit unsustainable modes of transport.
1. GG3 1.3.4 The Healthy Streets Approach outlined in this plan puts improving health and reducing health inequalities at the heart of planning London’s public space. It will tackle London’s inactivity crisis, improve air quality and reduce the other health impacts of living in a car-dominated city by planning street networks that work well for people on foot and on bikes, and providing public transport networks that are attractive alternatives to car use. It will also ensure that streets become more social spaces.
2. GG5 To maximise London’s existing and future public transport, walking and cycling network, as well as its network of town centres, to support agglomeration and economic activity.
3. GG2 I welcome the policy of encouraging densification around major transport interchange points.
Where I feel the draft London Plan is not robust or ambitious in its objectives:
T2 Road pricing: existing schemes reviewed – 2018-2020 This must be more specific. Road pricing must include Taxis, PHVs and remove exemptions, all motor vehicles cause congestion. The hours of the Congestion Charge need to be extended to 24/7.And the price needs to be raised.
Road pricing: next generation charging (subject to further assessment) – 2022-2041 This need to be prioritised and ASAP. The time frame is not ambitious enough.
The car parking standards for outer London (policies T6.1, T6.2 and T6.3) seem unnecessarily generous and difficult to reconcile with the welcome objective of increasing to 80% the proportion of journeys to be made by sustainable modes of transport. We already have 6.8 million parking spaces taking up more than 78.5 km sq. We cannot afford to allocate any more precious floor space or land to this economically illiterate use of prime space. Carfree development must cover the whole of Greater London not just CAZ.
I support Policy T6.1 F. The provision of car parking should not be a reason for reducing the level of affordable housing in a proposed development. But the definition of affordable housing must be clear. Social housing must be clearly defined and not open to loopholes.
Policy T6.1 makes the crucial point that car parking diminishes the ability to make full economic and socially inclusive use of prime land. Residential car lots and spaces make individual units less and less affordable for tenants. They also result in fewer units as a whole, meaning the supply of housing across the city is reduced. That too hikes up rents over time, as Boroughs run out of sites to develop.
Table-10-3 in the draft London Plan sets out maximum parking provision for residential units, based on PTAL. Whilst I support CAZ being car-free, parts of inner London and Outer London PTAL have maximum car parking of between 0.25-1.5 per unit. If the Mayor achieves the increase from 29,000 homes a year to 66,000 per year, we can anticipate a significant rise in the number of car parking spaces in London.
This runs totally counter to the Mayors ambition to reduce car dependency. And how much potential housing and office floor space will be lost to more car storage? There must be NO more car parking in London. We need clear reductions in parking and car infrastructure to facilitate maximum usage of prime land for housing.
Conversely, the minimum cycle parking standards (Policy T5 and Table 10.2) are insufficient to drive “the ambitious aim to reduce Londoners’ dependency on cars”. Moreover 60,000ambient cycle parking spaces are required in the London Plan to acheive this aim.
Cycling CTAL replacing PTAL would Increase access to public transport through cycling infrastructure Tjos is set out on Page 40-42The Strategic Cycling Analysis This would unlock carfree development throughout Greater London. CTAL cycling infrastructure must compliment PTAL to open up areas throughout Greater London to car-free development.
Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy must contribute funding to appropriate CTAL cycling infrastructure.
Licensing of pedicabs and emerging cycling taxi apps must be included as vital sustainable transport for ‘Good Growth’ Dedicated pedicab ranks at major interchanges must be provided in the London Plan.
I support all proposed walking and cycling bridges Rotherhithe, Nine Elms to Pimlico and would like these to be prioritised.
I do not support Silvertown Tunnel. We must not build new roads which induce more motor traffic use.
I welcome the Mayor’s stance on Heathrow (policy T8D). But am opposed to any expansion of airport capacity in the south-east including City Airport and Gatwick and believe that all journeys over land should be made by rail rather than air.