New telegraph pole installed, would like it moved - please help!

ProDave

theoretica said:

I am looking forward to self driving cars which can take themselves off out of the way and come when needed - either individually owned or from a communal pool.

While it might be better use of a resource, I cannot for the life of me see how it can possibly be better for the environment (which is what is driving change at the moment)?

Your own car sits outside your house until you want it, and it travels the distance you need to travel.

A shared self drive car has to get itself from wherever it is stored (which might be where it's last customer left it) to your house, then travel the mileage that you want to travel.  That can only possibly result in the vehicle doing MORE miles, probably empty some of the time.  Nobody is ever going to persuade me that is better for the environment than your own car sitting there until needed.

user1977

ProDave said:

theoretica said:

I am looking forward to self driving cars which can take themselves off out of the way and come when needed - either individually owned or from a communal pool.

While it might be better use of a resource, I cannot for the life of me see how it can possibly be better for the environment (which is what is driving change at the moment)?

Your own car sits outside your house until you want it, and it travels the distance you need to travel.

A shared self drive car has to get itself from wherever it is stored (which might be where it's last customer left it) to your house, then travel the mileage that you want to travel.  That can only possibly result in the vehicle doing MORE miles, probably empty some of the time.  Nobody is ever going to persuade me that is better for the environment than your own car sitting there until needed.

But a huge proportion of the energy and resources consumed by cars is in manufacturing them in the first place. Making fewer of them saves on that. Plus fewer of them around means less need to store them etc - so in our streets, potentially more greenery and less tarmac.

Section62

Sarahspangles said:

I suspect the tweak that is coming to keep up with the times will not be more parking, but more active travel and less car ownership.

This! A hundred years ago there were few cars and people walked or took trams to work. Now - suddenly - lots of people can work from home and taxi/train when they have to go in. So we’re probably past ‘peak car’ already. We’re just at the point where it may be cheaper to use taxis/hired vans than keep our second car.

About 25 years ago people in transport planning were saying the same thing, except calling it "non-traditional transport modes" rather than "active travel".  The result was housing estates built without sufficient off-street parking provision, replicating the problems with the estates of the 50's and 60's where the planners didn't think people would need cars, or thought that they should control how people will travel.  The problems faced by people on the OP's street also exist on many new-build estates, the only difference is the planners in the 90's/00's didn't have the excuse of not knowing that people living in these homes were likely to want to own a car.

People use cars for a lot more than driving to work.  Changes in lifestyle/working patterns won't necessarily lead to a reduction in car ownership or less use (which are two separate things).  E.g. People having more leisure time as a result of working from home will be able to fill that time with other activities... such as going to the gym.  Believing that people will exclusively use 'active travel' to get to (say) the gym would be unwise.

The other consideration is that if people continue to own cars (for leisure/domestic reasons) but work from home and don't use the car for commuting, then the pressure on residential parking will be upward (because the space needed in daytime for visitors/traders etc won't be available because work-from-home resident's cars will be occupying the otherwise available space).

The faulty assumption that less parking space would lead to reduced car ownership/use was eventually realised, which is why maximum parking standards were quietly dropped from national/regional planning guidance, except in those areas where public transport is excellent, and the local authorities involved still have an ambition to make everyone use social transport.

Finally, having self-driving cars which could be sent away to find a parking spot elsewhere (or aimlessly drive round until needed) would increase vehicle use (and energy consumption) as well as increasing congestion.  If this becomes a 'thing', future governments may need to legislate to regulate use of such vehicles and prohibit (or punitively charge) trips which serve no purpose other than avoiding the need to park.

Section62

user1977 said:

ProDave said:

theoretica said:

I am looking forward to self driving cars which can take themselves off out of the way and come when needed - either individually owned or from a communal pool.

While it might be better use of a resource, I cannot for the life of me see how it can possibly be better for the environment (which is what is driving change at the moment)?

Your own car sits outside your house until you want it, and it travels the distance you need to travel.

A shared self drive car has to get itself from wherever it is stored (which might be where it's last customer left it) to your house, then travel the mileage that you want to travel.  That can only possibly result in the vehicle doing MORE miles, probably empty some of the time.  Nobody is ever going to persuade me that is better for the environment than your own car sitting there until needed.

But a huge proportion of the energy and resources consumed by cars is in manufacturing them in the first place. Making fewer of them saves on that. Plus fewer of them around means less need to store them etc - so in our streets, potentially more greenery and less tarmac.

The same argument can be made about homes.

Try selling the idea to the voting public that they should forget about living in their own home, and instead share one with several other families/people.

The energy/resources issue is also very much to do with the way in which cars were traditionally made (and people's enthusiasm for 'new' cars).  Changes to manufacturing methods and reuse of parts (not just recycling) could deliver similar outcomes to reducing total car ownership. Extending vehicle lifetimes would also be a significant environmental benefit - as we move towards EVs, having a 30 year old vehicle in daily use could become a norm, just as the aviation industry thinks nothing of operating 30 year old aircraft.

And if the concern really is about the waste of energy and resources then why pick on cars?  There are many other things we do in this throwaway world which waste both in greater measure.

tooldle

ProDave said:

theoretica said:

I am looking forward to self driving cars which can take themselves off out of the way and come when needed - either individually owned or from a communal pool.

While it might be better use of a resource, I cannot for the life of me see how it can possibly be better for the environment (which is what is driving change at the moment)?

Your own car sits outside your house until you want it, and it travels the distance you need to travel.

A shared self drive car has to get itself from wherever it is stored (which might be where its last customer left it) to your house, then travel the mileage that you want to travel.  That can only possibly result in the vehicle doing MORE miles, probably empty some of the time.  Nobody is ever going to persuade me that is better for the environment than your own car sitting there until needed.

You’ve forgotten the environmental impact of producing cars for individuals. One car shared amongst a group of people versus each of the group having their own car. As a bonus, less cars parked on streets and pavements means less obstructions.

Sarahspangles

The pandemic makes the statistics harder to interpret but even before it started the trend was for young people to value access to transport more highly than car ownership - bikes, scooters, taxis and public transport.  A decade ago I drove to work every day and my employer provided a parking permit.  If in future more offices downsize to ‘hot desk only’ with limited parking, and my once a week commute incurs a congestion zone charge and hefty parking fee, I’ll find an alternative.  I already have most of my groceries delivered.  At the point one of our cars needs a significant repair, we will go down to sharing the other.  

Section62

tooldle said:

ProDave said:

theoretica said:

I am looking forward to self driving cars which can take themselves off out of the way and come when needed - either individually owned or from a communal pool.

While it might be better use of a resource, I cannot for the life of me see how it can possibly be better for the environment (which is what is driving change at the moment)?

Your own car sits outside your house until you want it, and it travels the distance you need to travel.

A shared self drive car has to get itself from wherever it is stored (which might be where its last customer left it) to your house, then travel the mileage that you want to travel.  That can only possibly result in the vehicle doing MORE miles, probably empty some of the time.  Nobody is ever going to persuade me that is better for the environment than your own car sitting there until needed.

You’ve forgotten the environmental impact of producing cars for individuals. One car shared amongst a group of people versus each of the group having their own car. As a bonus, less cars parked on streets and pavements means less obstructions.

How frequently do car clubs replace their vehicles because they are no longer 'new', look a bit tatty, or have clocked up so much mileage that the economics dictate they are traded on before becoming worthless?

How does that compare to the time the average individual will keep a car they own?

Car clubs are a great idea - but they do also give access to a vehicle to people who normally wouldn't consider buying and using one.  So if there were an environmental advantage of needing fewer cars being manufactured, it comes at the risk of people who would normally walk/cycle/use PT deciding to jump into the readily available shared car instead.

BikingBud

baser999 said:

@ theoretica, nice idea but not sure where all these cars are going to be stored when not in use

Given that many personally owned vehicles sit idle I don't expect pool vehicles to need a large amount of storage space.

BikingBud

Parking of personal vehicles is an issue directly related to poor infrastructure and lack of coherent holistic transport policy.

We all want our freedom to travel independently but this leads us ironically to being sat in a traffic jam with many other like minded people.

We will never reach Utopia, as there are likely too many conflicting VIs and in the absence we will tinker round the edges applying sticking plasters with no long lasting or effective benefit. 

TripleH

We have 1 car, as do our neighbours, we offer our spare space if not needed to others should they need a temporary extra space.

With the clean air zones coming in (when not if) that will increase the cost of parking. I just wish the zones came in in ever increasing circles with the funds raised spent on improving public transport. The best solution to parking is to cut demand which will take time. The problem is policy decided by London based politicians who ignore those in rural locations who have a 'need'.

As for the pole issue, it might be worth looking now at alternatives for parking because the risk is others may complain and snap the council into action. People tend to vent and react, when here proactive solutions might be better.