Centralised discussion space for TfL plans and cycling in London

cc/ @Fox

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kensington-cycle-lane-review-rbkc-sadiq-khan-b1784855.html

I wonder if this will lead to anything positive - i.e. infrastructure. The knee jerk reaction to want to remove the lane didn't surprise me, but what did surprise me was the lack of any project objectives / outcomes / criteria / monitoring and evaluation. Setting up some criteria to evaluate your first segregated cycle infrastructure in a politically sensitive environment would have been sensible. Lets see how this plays out.

It highlights how providing for cycling is still an optional extra among certain councils.

Kensington think they're doing the minimum as long as they are providing flat tarmac suitable to drive on is built and maintained.

I can only imagine there are a set of legal requirements on road planning that account for most of not all of what motor vehicle operators want. What people on bike want is an addition to any such process. So there goes your oversight and project control.

K&c are the worst borough for cycling. Hopefully something meaningful comes through this, but given the councils history I'm not placing bets.

My working assumption is they've realised removing it so rashly was likely to be found unlawful, and this is just trying to provide some arse covering.

I think so.. according to the council own information no metrics were used to assess its sucess/failure and the trail period wasn't even complete.
They refused to answer any questions to media, clearly they have done wrong.
But when the tick box exercise ends I suspect while be back to what was before.

Some really good news from us today: Late last year, Guys and St Thomas Health Charity proposed to fund 3 low-traffic neighbourhoods in Southwark, and a long-term study of the health and wellbeing impacts ( https://www.lcc.org.uk/articles/low-traffic-neighbourhoods-delivering-public-health-outcomes-across-london )

The LTNs went live today and they look great!

https://twitter.com/London_Cycling/status/1348962705659613185

1 Attachment

Well done! I moved from southwark a while back but great to hear about this.

The funding approach is fascinating. I wonder if it will catch on elsewhere. I remember a really good report on active travel from public health england a few years ago. After reading that i was in little doubt that generally public health leaders would make far better decisions on local transport infrastructure than the usual transport engineers and others in local government who are so fixated on car traffic etc.

Old street "roundabout" is finished off this weekend in terms of traffic flow. It looks like an easier junction to negotiate by bike but I doubt it's optimal. TFL's obsession with "peninsularisation" doesn't feel right here. Trafalgar Square and Highbury Corner just about work as squares but who wants to hang around at Old St?

A simple junction with segregated lanes would be much more intuitive than what they've put down. This is one of the last large first generation segregation projects initiated by Johnson et al.

The roundabout has/had a tube station and associated gubbins in the middle of it. A simple junction would end up on top of it.

So does Oxford Circus?

Not great news on the climate crisis and road danger to cyclist front yesterday regarding the High Court ruling, but TFL are appealing and there is no immediate requirement to suspend or remove Streetspace schemes.
Detailed update from us here https://www.lcc.org.uk/articles/response-to-high-court-ruling-on-tfl-streetspace-plans-and-bishopsgate-scheme

We've published an article setting out what we want to see from TFL and Kensington and Chelsea Council regarding the dangerous Battersea Bridge junction, where a runner was tragically killed by a driver a week ago.

It's likely that no one on LFGSS needs telling how dangerous this junction is. And of course it bears relevance to junctions across London, and the world.

https://www.lcc.org.uk/articles/battersea-bridge-provide-safe-conditions-for-pedestrians-and-cyclists

Looks like Haringey are starting to look at low traffic zones. Up until now they've been pretty shit at anything but prioritising motor traffic so it will be interesting to see where this goes.

One in Bounds Green which I know little about https://boundsgreenltnmap.commonplace.is/comments and two adjoining ones in St Ann's https://stannsltnmap.commonplace.is/comments and Bruce Grove/Tottenham https://tottenhambrucegroveltn.commonplace.is/comments which I'm more familiar with

Some prime rat-running routes (particularly in St. Ann's) so it will be interesting to see how this ends up.

Obviously also local concerns about how it will impact the areas outside the LTN. The Ladder area is concerned about how it will impact the already busy Wightman Road and the Duckett's Green area on the edge of the two schemes (circled in blue) will definitely suffer increased rat-running from displaced traffic. (Weirdly that area has been parcelled in to another possible future LTN with an area that it doesn't have any traffic links to.)

1 Attachment

Seems a pity they aren't connected to Islington's efforts to the South, but Hackney/Islington and now Haringey seem to be going big to the extent that a large part of North London should start to see some changes.

Have you seen this map of the plan for the whole borough:
https://twitter.com/Ianbarnes2001/status/1359857317995495425

It's not clear if they're planning to cut off Wightman Road as they so obviously should.

Seems a pity they aren't connected to Islington's efforts to the South

The borough boundary more-or-less matches obvious cell boundaries, so there's not much need for coordination.

Islington plans to cover the whole borough this council term, but us northerners have to wait.

Yeah I've just found a map showing the whole of Haringey is to be chopped up!

Yes. I don't know all the areas but the Turnpike Lane East LTN (the one with Duckett's Green above) is weird as there's an old railway line across the middle which completely separates the two zones to either side. It makes me wonder whether other LTNs have been designed just based around the boundary roads without thinking about what's in them.

I have strong suspicions that Wightman will be kept open. The LTN they're doing at the moment (Bruce Grove) has a couple of B roads (Belmont Road/Downhills Way {which is very residential} and Philip Lane) as boundaries.

Given the amount of house building that is planned and already happening north of Wightman I suspect they'll be keeping it open to alleviate that extra traffic.

as there's an old railway line across the middle which completely separates the two zones to either side.

That's normal. You need a line (real or imaginary) in the middle of every LTN that cars can't cross. The St Peter's (Angel) LTN in Islington was created mostly by bollarding the canal bridges.

Given the amount of house building that is planned and already happening north of Wightman I suspect they'll be keeping it open to alleviate that extra traffic.

New developments in Haringey aren't car free? They need to change that if they're serious about this shiz.

Does anyone know the thinking behind the bollards on Great Suffolk St and Southwark Bridge Rd?

There is a line splitting the 2 lanes (fine) but then there's also one bang in the middle of the lane. As far as I can see cars are still allowed to travel on the pink arrow but to do so they end up veering in to the opposite lane.

2 Attachments

It's part of the Great Suffolk Street 'LTN'. The drawings you want are on page 12 of this document (see especially the inset):

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/23447/LSP-Great-Suffolk-St-area-LTN-trial-notice-dated-22-Oct-2020-.pdf

That short stretch is meant to be modally filtered as per this scheme, i.e. drivers aren't permitted to drive along Great Suffolk Street between Webber Street and Southwark Bridge Road. You've nearly missed out the 'no motor vehicles' sign in your photograph (less than half of it is visible at the right), and there should also be a 'no left turn' sign just ahead of the pedestrian crossing on Southwark Bridge Road (outside the left of the picture), as well as corresponding signs on the other side. The 'delineators' (wands) are flexible so emergency service drivers can drive over them. The whole thing is meant to be two cycle-only lanes on this short stretch. Needless to say, it's confusing and many drivers will fail to understand it. I have to say that in this case I don't blame them.

I've long given up commenting on the piss-poor way most of these schemes are conceived. This one is one of the worst I've ever seen, getting pretty much everything wrong. I doubt it'll last in this form, it's just so ridiculously bad (famous last words).

Thanks for the reply Oliver. I was looking for signs on the left lane and hadn’t spotted the no motor vehicles sign on the right.

I’m only riding through there once or twice a week at the moment but have already witnessed plenty of dodgey moves from motor vehicles to get on to Webber St (as well as one van blasting the wrong way up Great Suffolk St).

Its better than nothing; that junction was notorious for drivers overtaking you to turn left

Just like everyone on a bike is a friend. All infra is good infra. For me.

No, it's worse than nothing, because if the 'LTN' gets removed again because of this rubbish design, it won't be replaced before long, and if it remains, it won't get replaced by a better design.

It's a highly problematic scheme that hasn't solved the left-turn issue. Plenty of drivers will get it wrong and it will have created new problems inside the cell, like the ones that Ed mentions.

Just like everyone on a bike is a friend. All infra is good infra. For me.

I assume the double irony here is deliberate. :)