Oxford Circus / Oxford Street improvements

[El_Greco]

Originally Posted by Bottlefall

Anyways, got any info on that Oxford Street tram?

Yeah - it aint gonna to happen!

[El_Greco]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

But those cities are tiny compared to London. From what I´ve seen, smaller British cities and towns are quite pedestrian friendly. As langur pointed out Place de la Concorde and the Champ Elysees are insanely hectic places. Although more attractive Champ Elysees makes Euston Road look like a country lane.

Smaller cities like Copenhagen, Stockholm and Tallin all have fantastic old towns which are mostly car-free. Outside these areas there´s quite a lot of traffic though.

So what if they are tiny?Does that now mean London streets at least the most famous ones cant be pedestrianised?Dont know about you but I dont like dodging cars and having to fight my way through ridiculously narrow pavements.

Champs Elysees



Oxford Street



Piccadilly



These are Londons most famous streets and yet they are an absolute nightmare to walk along.Pedestrianisation would work wonders here.

[Madman]

Its unfair to compare simply like that as the Champs Elysee is like 4 times wider than Oxford St. Its is however jammed full of traffic and not nearly as picturesque in the day as your photos suggest.

[Langur]

Originally Posted by El_Greco

What about Copenhagen Stockholm Zurich many Dutch cities & towns? Indeed many European cities are pursuing anti-car policies and are doing their best to make their cities pleasant for pedestrians.Its completely the opposite in London and indeed the UK.

We have loads of anti-car policies. We have some of the world's highest petrol prices, highest parking fees/fines, highest speeding fines, tons of road space taken away from cars in favour of buses and bikes (ie bus lanes), and a steep congestion charge in Central London. Trafalgar Square, which was never as bad as the examples in Rome and Paris that I mentioned, was partially pedestrianised. Piccadilly Circus and Leicester Square were partially pedestrianised years ago. Covent Garden Piazza is closed to traffic. The core of Chinatown is pedestrianised, and districts like Soho, Mayfair, and Fitzrovia have had so many obstacles and one way systems introduced, that they're practically unnavigable for anyone but locals and knowledgable taxi drivers. Pavement widening schemes are now common (this scheme at Oxford Circus is merely the latest example). There has been no investment in new road capacity for decades now, and such an approach to traffic management is a deliberate strategy. And, as has been mentioned by others already, the smaller cities you mention are simply not faced with the same kind of pressures as London.

[Langur]

Originally Posted by Madman

Its unfair to compare simply like that as the Champs Elysee is like 4 times wider than Oxford St. Its is however jammed full of traffic and not nearly as picturesque in the day as your photos suggest.

My example wasn't the Champs Elysees anyway. It was Place de la Concorde. Place de la Concorde is Paris's most important square. I suppose its closest London equivalent is Trafalgar Square. Traflagar Square never had anywhere near as much traffic as Place de la Concorde, and yet it's Trafalgar Square that has been partially pedestrianised. Etoile (around the Arc de Triomphe) is another of Paris's really high profile public spaces where there are about ten lanes of traffic surrounding the Arc on all sides. Ditto the Colosseum in Rome. Meanwhile Trafalgar Square, Leicester Square, Piccadilly Circus, and Covent Garden Piazza (that's all of central London's most important public squares) are all either partially or wholly pedestrianised.

[dom]

The reasons why Oxford Circus hasn't been pedestrianised are legion.

The main ones surrounds bus routes.... a lot of bus routes feed through Oxford Street and having them running through Fitzrovia wouldn't get the backing of residents along those side streets etc.

[gazzab1990]

Wouldn't delivery of goods be an issue as well?

[sergioib]

Yes, definitely. I do think delivery of good could not be done any other way and it is basically a commercial area, so shops would probably say no.

As for Oxford Circus itself and its engineering works, how are they going to be carried out without causing much disruption in the area to traffic and pedestrians?

[chrissyb]

What happened to the exciting innovative hovering light sculpture, or the completely impractical elevated tram system?

[Octoman]

Originally Posted by Langur

We have loads of anti-car policies. We have some of the world's highest petrol prices, highest parking fees/fines, highest speeding fines, tons of road space taken away from cars in favour of buses and bikes (ie bus lanes), and a steep congestion charge in Central London. Trafalgar Square, which was never as bad as the examples in Rome and Paris that I mentioned, was partially pedestrianised. Piccadilly Circus and Leicester Square were partially pedestrianised years ago. Covent Garden Piazza is closed to traffic. The core of Chinatown is pedestrianised, and districts like Soho, Mayfair, and Fitzrovia have had so many obstacles and one way systems introduced, that they're practically unnavigable for anyone but locals and knowledgable taxi drivers. Pavement widening schemes are now common (this scheme at Oxford Circus is merely the latest example). There has been no investment in new road capacity for decades now, and such an approach to traffic management is a deliberate strategy. And, as has been mentioned by others already, the smaller cities you mention are simply not faced with the same kind of pressures as London.

Thats a great post Monkey.

[El_Greco]

Yeah but pretty much everything is more expensive here than in other European countries and those fines are designed to make money and not to discourage people from using cars.Thats why we dont see government providing us with alternatives - no trams new tube lines etc.

Originally Posted by dom

The reasons why Oxford Circus hasn't been pedestrianised are legion.

The main ones surrounds bus routes.... a lot of bus routes feed through Oxford Street and having them running through Fitzrovia wouldn't get the backing of residents along those side streets etc.

Build a tram then.

[Langur]

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Yeah but pretty much everything is more expensive here than in other European countries and those fines are designed to make money and not to discourage people from using cars.

Not everything's more expensive now lol. Exchange rates have changed! However our petrol prices remain some of the highest in the world and the reason is because 75% of what we pay at the pump is tax. There's also road tax, compulsory insurance, MOTs, etc. And the fines and fees may be designed to earn revenues but they are obviously disincentives to drive. I cannot think of any other country in the world that makes it so expensive and difficult to drive and yet you seriously argue that we don't have disincentives to driving!!?

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Thats why we dont see government providing us with alternatives - no trams new tube lines etc.

Crossrail is a 118km new line under construction. That's longer than the entire Singapore metro network. The Thameslink project is also huge. Plus we already have the world's longest Tube network, the 2nd largest urban rail network in the world (after Tokyo), and what's probably the world's largest urban bus fleet. So please don't tell me we have no alternatives! We have loads!!

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Build a tram then.

Why are trams so much better than buses? They go at a similar speed and carry a similar amount of people. Buses have the advantage of not needing tracks so that transport planners have much more flexibility to redesign and change routes as there is no additional infrastructure. With buses people can be brought to Oxford Street from all over London and that's exactly what the shops want. With trams we'd have to build a massive network to do the same thing.

[El_Greco]

Public transport is overcrowded filthy dangerous (no Im not talking about terrorists here) expensive and most of the time - late.Its a nightmare to use it.No wonder so many people choose to drive!And they will pay through the nose just to avoid using public transport.

Sure Crossrail is U/C but how long its been in planning?40-50 years?It will take 5 or more just to complete it and by the time its complete youll need whole new Crossrail because of the increased population.The Tube can barely cope already.Ever tried taking it during rush hour?
As for buses they are only good for short-distance journeys.Nobody living in the suburbs takes a bus to Oxford Street!The journey would take ages!Trust me I know!

It would be good if they replaced some routes with Trams.Trams are clean fast and they just look cool.Theyd also remove much of the street clutter and people would be able to use streets and not just narrow pavements.For places like Oxford Street it would mean more business since many people avoid going shopping there because its so filthy and congested.Trams would remove all that maybe youd even have street cafes opening up and making what is now a soul destroying place pleasant.

[Steve87]

Originally Posted by eXSBass

I love how the street is a marble colour in the render!

I think the finishing plays a big part here. Just to name a few things that would certainly add to the charm of Oxford Street:
- widen its pavements
- cover street and pavements with quality materials
- exchange the street lamps (who on earth put these up?!)
- take away these black fences at junctions and crossings

Gehl Architects have made a study on this:
http://www.gehlarchitects.com/?#/165291/

[sweek]

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Build a tram then.

A tram along Oxford Street would make cross-Oxford Street-journeys a much bigger hassle, and you'd have to deal with a lot of bus routes terminating at both ends. Right now I can take the 390 from Euston to Notting Hill for example. If the tram would be built you'd have one bus line terminating at Tottenham Court Road, where I'd have to change for a tram to Marble Arch, to change to another bus from there to Notting Hill. Not exactly great, and there's no place for all those terminating buses to go either.
We've already moved everything but bus and taxi traffic off Oxford Street to side streets. There is no realistic way of diverting the public transport as well.

[Langur]

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Public transport is overcrowded filthy dangerous (no Im not talking about terrorists here) expensive and most of the time - late. Its a nightmare to use it. No wonder so many people choose to drive! And they will pay through the nose just to avoid using public transport.

This is nonsense. Most London buses are fresh and new. They're not filthy, and half of them seem to be driving around empty or near empty (such was the fanatacism of Ken's bus drive). Public transport is much cheaper than driving in London. If you seriously think there's any comparison then I can only suspect you've never driven in London.

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Sure Crossrail is U/C but how long its been in planning?40-50 years?It will take 5 or more just to complete it and by the time its complete youll need whole new Crossrail because of the increased population. The Tube can barely cope already. Ever tried taking it during rush hour?
As for buses they are only good for short-distance journeys. Nobody living in the suburbs takes a bus to Oxford Street! The journey would take ages! Trust me I know!

It would be good if they replaced some routes with Trams.Trams are clean fast and they just look cool. Theyd also remove much of the street clutter and people would be able to use streets and not just narrow pavements. For places like Oxford Street it would mean more business since many people avoid going shopping there because its so filthy and congested. Trams would remove all that maybe youd even have street cafes opening up and making what is now a soul destroying place pleasant.

Rubbish. Trams go the same speed as buses. In central London they'd often have to share street space with other vehicles so they'd get caught up in congestion just the same as buses (though in other places, like buses, they'd have their own lanes). If you need to go faster then use the Tube. People aren't going to Oxford Street during the morning rush hour anyway, and the late rush hour is always much more spread out. The Tubes are crowded but you can generally get on them in the afternoons. And anyway they're spending £billions on new trains, longer trains, new signalling to boost frequencies etc. We've got longer trains on the Bakerloo and Jubilee lines right? That's a significant increase in capacity right there - easily as much as population growth. We're getting these nice new air conditioned walk-through trains on the cut-and-cover lines too. We're getting an extended East London Line and we got a massive new extension on the Jubilee Line just a few years ago. Crossrail and Thameslink will increase London's transport capacity by far far more than any population growth forecasts. And when people say "40 years in planning" they exaggerate. It has been a serious project for a much shorter time. Trams will not by themselves do anything to remove street clutter or widen pavements. After all trams need stops and sometimes dedicated travel lanes just the same as buses. I note that the current plan includes widening of pavements and reduction of clutter and yet still you complain! Street cafes will not be allowed to open up on Oxford Street and nor should they. The street is too narrow in the eastern half and there's just too much demand on limited space throughout its entire length. There are already loads of cafes in the streets around Oxford Street that cater to shoppers. How many are there around St Christopher's Place? What about those streets just north and east of Oxford Circus? You have pedestrianised areas, wide pavements, cafes etc - all the things you masturbate over. The best we can do with Oxford Street is to improve the paving, reduce the clutter, and generally try to manage it better. However it's never going to be this wide beautiful boulevard of fantasy, and I think there are serious issues in pedestrianising it too (mainly related to reducing access and/or imposing an intolerable burdon on neighbouring streets). The current proposals are practical and achievable. And anyway that crossing at Shibuya is seriously cool.

[fitz44]

http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/b...200359.article

Small article here with a video showing the new layout.

[Langur]

^ Great video. It will work so much better.

[Mr Bricks]

Originally Posted by El_Greco

So what if they are tiny?Does that now mean London streets at least the most famous ones cant be pedestrianised?Dont know about you but I dont like dodging cars and having to fight my way through ridiculously narrow pavements.

You can´t pedestrianise big streets in huge cities. In smaller cities with less traffic pedestrianisation is easier. Maybe they could ban all vehicles from using Oxford Street except for buses, taxis and delivery lorries. Smaller streets on the other hand should be pedestrianised.

Originally Posted by El_Greco

These are Londons most famous streets and yet they are an absolute nightmare to walk along.Pedestrianisation would work wonders here.

As many people already pointed out I think the biggest problem is street clutter. As a tourist I found the streets of Paris and London to be quite the same when it comes to traffic and crowds. Well except for Piccadilly Circus which was over crowded.

[sergioib]

Originally Posted by Langur

Not everything's more expensive now lol. Exchange rates have changed! However our petrol prices remain some of the highest in the world and the reason is because 75% of what we pay at the pump is tax. There's also road tax, compulsory insurance, MOTs, etc. And the fines and fees may be designed to earn revenues but they are obviously disincentives to drive. I cannot think of any other country in the world that makes it so expensive and difficult to drive and yet you seriously argue that we don't have disincentives to driving!!? Crossrail is a 118km new line under construction. That's longer than the entire Singapore metro network. The Thameslink project is also huge. Plus we already have the world's longest Tube network, the 2nd largest urban rail network in the world (after Tokyo), and what's probably the world's largest urban bus fleet. So please don't tell me we have no alternatives! We have loads!!Why are trams so much better than buses? They go at a similar speed and carry a similar amount of people. Buses have the advantage of not needing tracks so that transport planners have much more flexibility to redesign and change routes as there is no additional infrastructure. With buses people can be brought to Oxford Street from all over London and that's exactly what the shops want. With trams we'd have to build a massive network to do the same thing.

I totally agree with you, fair point!