Search results for:

As ever, I think the reality is far more complex than folks accept.

1. BoJo & Gilligan, like then or loathe them, flipping delivered from a standing start following the 2012 election (not the 2008 one obviously - blue paint). And Gilligan managed to deliver London's first truly high quality schemes in some very unexpected places. This should not be contested.
   
2. That said, come on, idea Sadiq has done sod all? Is incontorvertibly rubbish. He was on track to triple the mileage of protected space in one term that Boris delivered in one term - ie he hit a run rate of double Boris'. But he didn't just do that. He actually ended his first term with 5x more cycle tracks than there were before. He's also got, during the crisis/Streetspace, more boroughs doing more cycle schemes than we've ever had before. That's obviously not all him, but it is under his watch. Lambeth, Islington particularly obvious, but Hounslow, Southwark etc. also. And who ever thought Harrow, Ealing, Wandsworth, Tower Hamlets etc would try to do as much as they did.
   
3. Issue is now we've seen some faltering backsteps from many boroughs. That is IMO partly Gilligan to blame - across England we've seen councils weak on active travel fail to deliver during crisis or pulling stuff out. There should have been far more clarity upfront about need for engagement and political leadership (not Gilligan's style IMO - he's a 'just do it' kinda guy), and far more work with boroughs who were wobbly, but also far clearer on cost of inaction to boroughs. That stuff only now coming in - too late. And it'll take work from Sadiq, Will Norman, to fix those issues.
   
4. As per my thread @Backstop mentions, yup, there are some real issues IMO with Sadiq's time. I think there's been far too little laser focus on boroughs to deliver - loads of them making weak excuses to delay schemes. But more, there are some real issues moving forward schemes with every stakeholder just holding vetoes. Not just TfL Buses, although they do appear to be an issue alongside TfL "Network Assurance" - both of whom seem invested in focusing heavily on small delays caused in modelling by cycling schemes while ignoring huge delays from 'too many cars' etc. But they're far from lone culprits or even possibly main ones. Everyone gets a veto - Canary Wharf, Port of London Authority, Royal Parks, Crown Estates Paving Commission, hospital trusts, landowners, developers, councillors, business associations - in 6 years at LCC I've faced 'em all. My big question here is why does Sadiq talk big on zero carbon 2030 now and then, or on VisionZero, then immediately duck for cover after. There's no real staying power on these issues. That's the big problem. Boris made cycling his big thing. Sadiq hasn't got one thing. Now, that could mean he's achieving more across board. But it feels he's spread thing. After all, if you can't focus fully on climate as London's Mayor...? Anyway, last point is to say that Boris seemed to have some more success on quietening the angry anti-cycling stakeholders that he also faced. But even there, there's a question over whether he delivered more as a result or whether he actually traumatised a bunch of councils and Will/Sadiq's more emolient approach was paying longer term dividends.
   Just my rambling thoughts on issue that's far far far more complex IMO than Sadiq bad, Johnson good, or vice versa.
   

1. There's not much in UK study, although there's a good quote from Gilligan when he launched the Enfield mini-Holland schemes that he went looking for studies and he couldn't find a single example where reducing traffic, putting in bike lanes etc. caused long-term decline, quite the opposite.
   
2. There's loads of US examples. Just do a quick google.
   
3. That said, British folks tend to be incredibly hyperlocal about stuff. When the modal filters were going in in Walthamstow, then no evidence from Hackney counted, let alone Groningen, Utrecht, Barcelona etc. Even when I found old filter cells in Walthamstow and Leyton, the cry was still "well, they're the right, good ones" - so older = OK.
   
4. Given this, I wouldn't try too hard - anyone determined to hate cycling schemes or in favour of easing parking restrictions won't listen to any studies or data from even the next road over. What is more achievable however is to ask them if they actually have surveyed and carefully identified parking need. Look at the Lea Bridge Road parking survey results on Enjoy Waltham Forest site - they went and asked businesses what proportion of customers arrived by car, then asked customers (massive disparity), but also then went back and checked who was using the parking spaces - it was the business owners, parked up for the day very often.
   

https://twitter.com/ShulemStern/status/922453277555425280

Air ambulance, near Clapton roundabout.

Short URL for CS4...

lcc.org.uk/cs4

And for CS9...

lcc.org.uk/cs9

Please do take a few minutes to fill bopth out. It's vital we show lots of support for what are good schemes!

lcc.org.uk/cs9

Quick two minute take from us at LCC on what to raise in the consultation. Please do everyone fill out a response - it is getting some stick locally. Same deal with CS4...

lcc.org.uk/cs4

Keep meaning to check LFGSS more regularly. But here goes (I'm LCC's Infrastructure Campaigner):
a) Yes, Westminster. Grrr.
b) This is an "interim" scheme and should have been more clearly labelled as such from the get-go. TfL still working hard on trying to get in a better scheme asap. Issue is that signalising this basically sends their computer models for traffic for whole of area into meltdown.
c) I'm with those who would basically say "so what?" Sadly, I don't run London. TfL Buses basically do.
d) The folks working on the final scheme are good. I have some hopes. I'll continue to push them.

A quick message to ask every single person on here to not just #signforcycling with the London Cycling Campaign, but get friends, relatives, family, strangers to also!
signforcycling.org

We’re asking the next Mayor to commit to:

More space for cycling on main roads and at junctions
A ‘Mini-Holland’ for every London borough
An end to lorry danger
We need loads of people to sign, because as you can see, some of the candidates are no feeling pressure to push on with more of the welcome infrastructure we're only just beginning to see go in. In fact, some of them may want to rip out the stuff we've fought so hard to get!

So we really need your support to make sure the momentum is kept up. More on the detail of the pledges at the site signforcycling.org

A quick message to ask every single person on here to not just #signforcycling with the London Cycling Campaign, but get friends, relatives, family, strangers to also!
http://signforcycling.org

We’re asking the next Mayor to commit to:

1. More space for cycling on main roads and at junctions
   
2. A ‘Mini-Holland’ for every London borough
   
3. An end to lorry danger
   
   

We need loads of people to sign, because as you can see, some of the candidates are no feeling pressure to push on with more of the welcome infrastructure we're only just beginning to see go in. In fact, some of them may want to rip out the stuff we've fought so hard to get!

So we really need your support to make sure the momentum is kept up. More on the detail of the pledges at the site http://signforcycling.org

If you ever cycle on or near Lea Bridge Road, or want to but are too scared to, please support some amazingly good schemes by putting in comments to the open consultations here this weekend: https://lbrproposals.commonplace.is/

Erm, sorry 7up, but I couldn't disagree more on just about every point you make.

1. The surrounding streets aren't more congested. Lea Bridge Road and Hoe Street got dramatically worse a few weeks after the full village scheme went in - when schools went back. But a) that could have been the scheme bedding in, and b) we simultaneously had huge roadworks on the north circ. Either way, last week or so, congestion back to roughly where it was before - ie sometimes horrible, sometimes fine, bit around Selbourne Road always fairly chuggy. Church Hill is exactly as it was before the scheme went in, and has remained that way throughout. Queuing on Shernhall onto Forest the same. Queuing other end onto LBR (Eastern Ave?) is worse - but not dramatically so.

2. Residential roads across the borders of the scheme largely unaffected - some quite a lot quieter. Look at "poets" roads or Howard - traffic counts definitely down from where they were before. Ratrunners not just displaced from one area, but several.

3. On top of that, of course, the village scheme represents one tiny fraction of even the residential schemes. Pretending the village is all Tarquins inaccurate enough. But what will you say when all of Blackhorse Village, Hoe/Wood and Markhouse in too?

4. There is not a high percentage of people who rely on access to private vehicles. Under half of all households in Walthamstow have access to a car, and most disabled folks don't use a car. We're not quite as low car as Hackney. But we're not miles off.

5. Loads of people have raised concerns over the schemes, sure - and Stella is getting it in the neck. There's a lot happening, fast. But that doesn't automatically mean there's been "little consideration" of anything. It just means people hate change.

Sorry, but again, look at not even Groningen, not even Hackney, but places in Walthamstow like north of Lea Bridge Road between Argall and Markhouse. Huge sodding road closure cell over there. Been in for decades. No one notices it. Does it mess up everyone else's drive? No. In six months time, most will barely remember the big mini-Holland panic of 2015.

At one of the Enfield public meetings, one of the antis apparently got up and said, with straight face, that women don't cycle and will never cycle to the shops because they want to get their hair done.

Orford Road, including Finamore, is rammed at the weekends. Now, some of that has undoubtedly been the sunshine of the last few weeks. But I was just up there for a coffee on a Monday mid-morning. Fairly busy. And it's raining today. Most businesses are clearly doing well out of it - and the environment is massively nicer. Meanwhile down on quieter Grove Road, a new cafe opened up and seems to be doing well also.

As far as I can see, the antis are increasingly shrill and insane - the filtered permeability "closures" have now been compared to, variously, North Korea, the Berlin Wall, and a black hole for cars; they've dragged a coffin up the street to signify the death of the village; they've compared council officers to Nazi concentration camp guards ("only following orders") etc. They're also all over the shop. They variously claim that they're pro cycling facilities and segregated tracks and only anti closures; but their page has loads of stuff saying to object to tracks at Whipps Cross and Hoe Street etc. The parallels to the SOS campaign in Green Lanes are very obvious. This lot of NIMBYs are just anti any change.

Meanwhile, yes, disabled folk can park at several spots within yards of the 100m stretch of Orford Road they can't get to, emergency services are at worst a bit confused if the driver hasn't navigated the closures before, and the anti shop next door to Finamore currently has an application in to change use from an architects' office to a cafe with pavement tables. As far as I understand it from several conversations with people who do know Finamore, btw, his stated problem that he can't load/unload for him or customers is rubbish - he has rear access with parking. The issue appears to be he used to rent that parking space out to someone else, and now can't.

OK folks, few points...

1. Stella's not anti the scheme, nor is she pro. She's trying to be determinedly neutral for a whole bunch of reasons - not many of which I agree with, but there you go. That email from her is her trying to sum up the gripes. I don't like it. But I don't think it's a sign of her pitching in with antis.

2. People, even on here, seem to view Orford Road as the start and end of the scheme. Work started today on the "Blackhorse Village" area. Bigger than the village area, less posh. We've got two more areas after that for "villagisation" (the names, dear god, the names).

And hell no to one-ways and traffic calming. It doesn't work. You can see it not working all over the borough. The Essex Road/Peterborough Road scheme that went in just south of the village at the same time as the village went in showed exactly how rubbish that idea is. Unless you're willing to put in speed humps like Matterhorns, that idea is a dead duck. All one way systems tend to do is increase traffic speed, collision frequency and severity. They don't remove through traffic. And then traffic calming just buffs the worst edges off it.

1. In the same vein, there are problems with Ruckholt - namely the lanes being too narrow and the lights being phased wrong. But those have been raised with officers, who agree with us, and are trying to find fixes. Ruckholt is also far from the only road in the borough due to get main road treatments. The rest are coming - they're just slower cos TfL, particularly its Buses arm, are crawling over the plans and modelling very carefully.
   

At uncontrolled crossings, the general idea is to wherever possible reduce turning movements into/out of the side road - that ties in with the "villagisation" road closure cells coming in. And yes, Copenhagen crossings then give priority to peds/cycles.

At controlled crossings, the general idea is to separate cycles from motor vehicles in time and/or space.

Skydancer - the plans AFAIK include lane widths etc. for the sections so far. The general principle is certainly wide, high-quality tracks on either side, along entire length of Lea Bridge Road, to the borough boundary with Hackney (hmmm).

Hairnetnic - a lot of the side roads on the northern side of LBR are due to be closed as part of Markhouse "village" - part of the residential schemes. That's awaiting consultation. The ones south side will also be looked at as part of Leyton town centre and Church Road schemes. I'd expect they'll use "blended" crossings as per stuff starting to go in around the village borders.

Shandoom - that entire junction incl that due to be looked at, yes.

Sturmeyarcher - agree totally on Riney's pace of work. It's s-l-o-w. Why village needs "villagisation"? Well, cos unlike us, most people are terrified of cycling - so we want quiet streets they can leave their front door from. Same principle will eventually apply in an area covering from LBR to Forest, Markhouse/Blackhorse to Wood St - thousands of properties where people will be able to leave front door, ride on far quieter streets to local shops, tubes, hospital, cinema etc. And pick up main road protected tracks for longer journeys. Same principle as you find, well all over Holland (and lots of other EU places, and Hackney etc.). Plus closed streets = kids can play out again, better community links, less crime, better for businesses of the type you get on Orford and increasingly Grove etc. (and in the other villages - small, neighbourhood shops). Massively shown to boost business.

TurtleRecall - go look at the plans - wide, high-quality protected tracks the whole length of Lea Bridge Road in both directions (if we ignore Hackney, that is - hmmm). Sure, us "vehicular" fast cyclists are fine in a bus lane. My eight year old? Not so much. That mum on a Christiana? Not so much. How would they do it in Holland? Protected tracks with enough provision for all-abilities cycling and tamed junctions. Well, that's what's proposed. And bus lanes are mostly still in by the way - the ones going, if any, are the ones that TfL know don't work and actually introduce delays to buses!

The village "village" (the naming is confusing and, well, rubbish - but remember - "villages" will eventually cover LBR-Forest and Markhouse/Blackhorse-Wood) will include a closure on Grove. And basically enough roads to discourage nearly all through or rat-run traffic. In the same vein, when the Markhouse "village" kicks in, Queens is one of the roads earmarked for closure. As is Boundary. But that's all subject to engagement, and consultation. The whole point is to discourage through traffic - that tends to be faster, more aggressive and does nothing nice for an area. Sure, that means some of us will need to drive round etc. And driving in to your road may take a minute or two more as you can't necessarily cut through neighbouring streets. But small price to pay IMHO.

http://www.enjoywalthamforest.co.uk/work-in-you-area/lea-bridge-road/

Please please please everyone who ever goes near this road get your comments in. This is a huge leap for an outer London borough and a huge leap full stop. Top quality infrastructure, much needed, needs your support (even if you want to say "and you could do that bit better...").

Thanks all!

I'm one of the local cycling campaigners most involved in this. Please please please stick in loads of comments on the consultation - good, bad, whatever you feel. But council really needs to know cyclists want great quality infrastructure!

It is absolutely amazing watching people utterly lose their sh*t and go ape crazy over a small shed.

Hairnetnic - not a lot of changes from the post-trial consultation document - a few changes to a few roads. But there were a lot of changes from the trial to the consultation. Essentially, we warned the council they weren't closing enough roads, we were right, and so the ratrunners got funnelled into fewer roads in some cases. The council then did act to deal with that issue we hope.

As the Waltham Forest Cycling Campaign's Council Liaison Officer, just thought I'd jump on and add one or two things:

1. Yup, some roads in the "villagisation" (read: us knicking Hackney's filtered permeability model) weren't properly closed off in trial - as Oliver put it, that's exactly why some roads were busier. We wait to see what final scheme looks like - but vibe in council is good and yup, residents were broadly in favour of it.

2. Sad to see even cyclists on here flummoxed by the "I/a mate was in a car stuck on the Lea Bridge Road and therefore it must be mini-Holland" cobblers. We had broken traffic lights in several key points for much of the (too short) trial, a closed north circ and a closed Blackwall Tunnel. The engineers have been over the data as best they can and their broad response was "Lea Bridge Road is often messed up - on the days it wasn't messed up, the villagisation trial doesn't seem to have added much traffic to the main roads". Fairly obviously, the capacity and flow of main roads even versus heavily ratrunned side roads is huge.

3. Ruckholt Road - they're using "cycle separated junctions", priority lights for cyclists and possibly even all-green scramble phases at junctions - the fine detail subject to final modelling and TfL sign-off. That means you should have no points at which you're in danger of being hooked etc. WFCC has a list of remaining problems we have with Ruckholt Road at our mini-Holland page - Alexandra Road is the main remaining issue.

4. We've now met with Enfield and Kingston to work better together to ensure the mini-Hollands all actually do look like mini-Hollands and not just business-as-usual - which I think the new Tory council in Kingston (the Lib Dems put the bid in) particularly were veering strongly towards.

5. I'll also be attending the next Hackney CC meet in early Feb - to discuss what can be done about the ends of Ruckholt Road and Lea Bridge Road where they hit the border with Hackney.

6. What's really important to understand, and has been a huge learning process for me personally from just before the trial to the end of December, is how much people fear and hate change. And how a few voices can dominate. Several thousand people signed the "stop mini Holland in Walthamstow" petition. But their biggest public turnouts have been 100 or so people. Many of them live outside the currently affected areas. Many come from groups that have clear reason to be upset - professional drivers and driving instructors, OAPs with mobility issues etc. Their concerns need answering, sure, but ultimately the reality is most people locally are either semi- in favour of plans or broadly in favour of them so far. A tiny minority of very angry people are intent on making a lot of noise - I'm increasingly ignoring them, as we've moved well beyond the point of sensible issues and discussions to wild conjecture, conspiracy theories and angry ranting.

London Cycling Campaign's Infrastructure Campaigner, Waltham Forest Cycling Campaign's Council Liaison Officer, dad, mountain biker, vegetarian, hip-hop fiend, weirdo