Forum Topic

Motor Vehicle users contribute a far higher and disproportionate amount both the exchequer and local councils,  Parking Permits, parking charges and the top of the league income for fines.All that is supposed to be returned to transport infrastructure. It's nearly all heading to Cycling and LTNs and other schemes that primarily benefit cyclists.Non vehicle owners benefit, so are effectively subsidised.Street lighting, traffic lights, illuminated warning signs , zebra crossings and a raft of things that cyclists benefit from are all paid for from the revenue raised from Vehicle owners and operators.When that income significantly reduces as the Mayor of London, TfL and this borough will be most vociferous with.Something remains that they are very quiet about and won't answer election campaign questions on.With a massive drop in road based income, who will make up the shortfall and how?Roads will still be vital for everyone who has to make a living. Directly or indirectly.Most of the money allocated has regularly been diverted and most of the revenue that could have created a fully integrated quality transport network. From the huge income from Road and Fuel taxes this could have been bought paid for and maintained.We still have an incomplete and inferior road and rail network, Poor management and indifferent politics since the end of the 1950s.So everyone, can expect a far more significant dent in their wallet for everything that is subsidised from the additional taxes currently paid by one part of society.

Raymond Havelock ● 194d

It's not cars in the main that cause the potholes. Although large 4X4 have traction that can ripple surfaces and there are a lot of those un urban areas.The main problem is the massive increase in delivery vans. Most streets are not deigned for heavier axle loadings and not on a continual basis.This will lead to a lot of sewer and cable disruption over a protracted period.The Refuse and recycling vehicles have heavier axle loading than previous designs which were specific to the limitations of the streets.There was a time when Council department heads knew all that and had a proper input into what could and could not be operated.Long wheelbase vans are still light but their payloads are often the same as a light HGV but exempt from HGV limitations.Some streets now have up to 100 van deliveries a day when just a couple of years ago it would be barely a dozen.Part of this is obvious, the covid lockdown, the other, the boom in online trading. The other is ignorance in the LTN planning as it has increased the requirement for households to have deliveries- even minor ones.Not so obvious is the damage manifesting under the road surface. Potholes are only the pimple on the ulcer.One example was the use of Bendy buses in Oxford street. There design, weigh and high capacity meant that one fully laden bus dealt a 'hammer blow' 9 times that of a traditional Routemaster bus fully laden, partly caused by a shock wave through its trailing axle. So three heavy depressions per movement.Within 14 months Burst pipes were occurring where these routes converged - Oxford st being worst.  TfL refused to accept the gaffe and chose to ignore 70 years of design research by London Transport. (The Routemaster, incredibly light and economic by the technology of the time was no accident, it was deliberately designed to suit the elderly and inherently weak road infrastructure that we still have. ) Then the pattern of leaks followed the 25 route outwards.The Bendy bus was ushered out using fare evasion as a justification. Another TfL half truth.Residential streets are not built for continual depressions from much lighter vehicles. Poor road surfaces cause bounce which increases the impact load.

Raymond Havelock ● 197d