Cleaning up London’s toxic air

Covent Garden is the prime example of an area where small interesting unique shops, young designer's shops, ordinary essential shops, all got driven out by the chain stores. Quant was the first to pay a much higher rent, then the others followed. Covent Garden was a much, much more interesting and alive area to shop and live in before the chains arrived. This had absolutely nothing to do with pedestrianisation, which mostly has not happened in Covent Garden.

On the other hand, this is simple economics.

Increase the footfall and opportunities for profit and firms that can respond more competitively will do so.

I live in an area where the owner of a large highstreet development sees advantage in turning his properties into residential accommodation and has raised the shop rentals ti absurd levels in order to drive them out. Predictably the result will be the conversion of the community into another dormitory suburb with local trade transferred to the 'shopping mall' dominated by 'small premises' chains and coffee shops while what used to be highstreet traders ( small, proprietorial stores; furniture, clothing, shoes, hardware etc) are directed to the nearest business estate dominated by large outlet chains.

Raising rents is merely another barrier to entry for small shopkeepers, and since public opinion is often driven by the perception that progress is measured by the availability of chain stores, highstreets become obsolete.

Weekends are really bad for traffic in the residential side streets because what feels like the entire population of the suburbs gets into their cars to drive into central London for shopping.
To reduce central London traffic I would focus on developing the suburban high streets into characterful, interesting, lively, 'world-class', shopping and entertainment centres. With interesting high quality archicture, and with residential development away from the traffic and deliveries.

And what about the residents?

You are not giving enough information. HOW does the Mayor propose to pedestrianise Oxford Street??

You cannot re-route the buses and other vehicles onto the residential side streets.
You cannot have the deliveries shifted to late evenings and night-times.

Mounting the pavement is still an offence,(section 72 of the highways Act 1835) but bizarrely parking on the pavement which must involve mounting the pavement isn't, and prosecution or prevention is now up to the council.

In many areas the councils feel that prosecution or prevention is NOT in the public interest because it generates such ill feeling against bodies such as the the Police or Trafficenforcemt authorities (eg: traffic wardens).

In my area pedestrian footpaths are frequently blocked by parked cars, but the statistics show that only two or three disabled people a day are inconvenienced enough to complain so it is 'democratic' (ie public opinion is demonstrably in favour) to allow the law to be compromised.

As Bristol has demonstrated, policing parking offences doesn't require officers on the street, merely cameras ,a computer and a willingness to be a target of resentment by those inconvenienced by being caught.

When pedestrianisation involves shifting buses and taxis to the residential side streets, and noisy polluting deliveries to night time, the negative health impacts on residents would be considerable. First you build alternative housing for the residents and move them out, then you turn the residential properties into commercial ones or better, demolish and rebuild rationally for better traffic management, then you can introduce pedestrianisation.

A cheaper solution is to make it mandatory for delivery vans, taxis and buses to run on lpg fuel or batteries from Jan 2017.

Ensuring all buses and taxis are converted in the next 6 months is utterly unrealistic and it would be vastly more costly than closing a few streets to cars and other vehicles.

Whilst I'm in favour of money going in to converting buses and taxis, in my area of London, private vehicles contribute enormously to pollution and I would love to see a comprehensive and integrated strategy employed - I think that the conversion of public transport and taxis to greener fuels is essential but a change to private transport in London is also necessary.

This topic is not about excluding cars on a permanent basis from central London but it is about closing roads on selected days and I fully support this. Given that many deliveries already take place at night, I see no problem in this respect. Key intersections are unlikely to be closed and bus journeys are unlikely to be significantly impacted. Tubes will run as normal.

The decision to close roads to traffic in central London is unlikely to be affected by the take-up of cycle insurance. Cyclists cause a tiny fraction of the deaths and injuries on Britain's roads and are far more likely to be victims themselves but they should of course be considerate and vigilant on the roads.

The problem with mandatory insurance is, it unfairly penalises the casual cyclists. The day-to-day commuters have no problem with paying £35, but it puts off the guy who gets his bike out of the shed once a month, or the occasional boris-biker, or the teenager on the £50 second hand mountain bike.

There is no licensing or testing of cyclists, let alone any policing. I have nothing against cyclists in principle, but my own experience is that a significant minority of cyclists show no respect for other road users or pedestrians. I'm supportive of cycle lanes, actually, but where they exist they should be mandated. I have been knocked over by cyclists on the pavement even in areas where there were cycle lanes. I have been attacked by a cyclist for daring to call him out for ignoring a clear sign saying "cyclists dismount" in an area of road works (ironically which were there as part of the process to create a new cycle super-highway); in this case he just attempted to mow through a congested area of pedestrians, shouting and swearing at them to get out of the way. My judgement is not based on this isolated incident, but on many such experiences during my 25 years in London.
If I had ever once seen a cyclist stopped and ticketed by a policeman for reckless riding, or if traffic cameras were able to identify cyclists carelessly sailing through red lights across pedestrian crossings, then I might feel differently.
I say have more provision for cyclists by all means, but enforce licensing (a cycle number plate?) and enforce good behaviour in the same way motorists are policed.
To answer your question more specifically, I cannot cycle due to disability, but I would like to think that I would be a more considerate bike user were that not the case. And we're I able to cycle, I would be perfectly happy to be tested, licensed & policed in the same way as other vehicle users.

I remember social interaction in public spaces - we used to have it years ago. Before central London became so overcrowded and full of traffic. It isn't just being traffic-free or nearly so that makes the difference. Community used to happen in central London on Sundays, when there would be a morning free of the millions of shoppers. Suddenly neighbours would become visible on the streets. Without consulting the residential communities, the retail industry and councils decided to maximise shopping and other economic activities in residential areas, to replace series of small local shops with large high street 'names' stores. So between market pressures and the councils, residents lost out. We no longer bump into our neighbours in the local greengrocer or bakers, because they have gone, replaced by either very upmarket shops for the rich from overseas, or by giant stores. We don't meet and chat on the streets because there are thousands of people on them, bent on spending in the shops. All local character has gone, and the most social interaction we get is being snarled out by shoppers or cyclists for being in their way.

Residents are battling to stop deliveries being permitted between 8pm and 8am because of the horrendous noise. Kids should not be walking to school until the air is fit to breathe.