Pop-up cycle lanes, the good, the bad, and the ugly.

[ian]

Yes, but the borough was saving money, which I'm sure is important. Think of the all the people who were getting a nice rebate on their council tax so they could splung it on yet another urban wanktank.

[DuncanM]

Ah, but it was the cycle lane that caused all that congestion, not the roadworks from the broken water main.
And it was the cycle lane that reduced footfall in business that were closed due to a National Lockdown.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/nov/30/kensington-and-chelsea-council-criticised-for-scrapping-cycle-lane

 

[drossall]

There was research once to show that reducing car access increased sales in shops. Not quite the same context - this was about pedestrianisation - but the general gist was that the trade lost from motorists who could not stop outside the shop to buy a paper was outweighed by the trade from people who were more willing to spend time shopping in a place not choked with cars. Not sure how relevant that would be here.

[grams]

My gut feeling is - this being a dense area of London - the vast majority of shoppers arrive on foot or by public transport or taxi. The "everyone round here drives a wankpanzer anyway" could only ever be a tiny minority, because where TF would more than a handful of them park?

[Cudzoziemiec]

My gut feeling is - this being a dense area of London - the vast majority of shoppers arrive on foot or by public transport or taxi. The "everyone round here drives a wankpanzer anyway" could only ever be a tiny minority, because where TF would more than a handful of them park?

On the pavement, dur!

[Sergeant Pluck]

My gut feeling is - this being a dense area of London - the vast majority of shoppers arrive on foot or by public transport or taxi. The "everyone round here drives a wankpanzer anyway" could only ever be a tiny minority, because where TF would more than a handful of them park?

Taxis: the campaign to have it closed was instigated by black cab drivers, as it is a lucrative area for them, and representatives of shops that are of the kind that has customers who can only arrive by cab as there is little parking close enough to permit a sufficiently short walk (and obviously public transport is out of the question). They then recruited various hatey loons on social media and amongst the Tory councillors, which resulted in a petition with lots of signatories who don’t even live in the area nor travel through it.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/kensington-cycle-lane-axed-refund-government-cash-b115087.html

Usual stuff for a country full of total bell-ends.

[ian]

There was research once to show that reducing car access increased sales in shops. Not quite the same context - this was about pedestrianisation - but the general gist was that the trade lost from motorists who could not stop outside the shop to buy a paper was outweighed by the trade from people who were more willing to spend time shopping in a place not choked with cars. Not sure how relevant that would be here.

Road-side parking encourages the spawning of convenience stores (one is never enough, basically people don't want to walk more than two car lengths to get a lottery ticket) and fast-food franchises. The sort of shop that lets people dash in and out, with the minimum of hassle. They'll drive on to the next one if there's not a spot. You see this effect in any high street. Compare and contrast with any pedestrianised area, where you'll start to see cafes and coffees shops, places where people will linger, so they're capturing foot traffic, either local or because people are willing to park and walk.

[Cudzoziemiec]

There was research once to show that reducing car access increased sales in shops. Not quite the same context - this was about pedestrianisation - but the general gist was that the trade lost from motorists who could not stop outside the shop to buy a paper was outweighed by the trade from people who were more willing to spend time shopping in a place not choked with cars. Not sure how relevant that would be here.

Road-side parking encourages the spawning of convenience stores (one is never enough, basically people don't want to walk more than two car lengths to get a lottery ticket) and fast-food franchises. The sort of shop that lets people dash in and out, with the minimum of hassle. They'll drive on to the next one if there's not a spot. You see this effect in any high street. Compare and contrast with any pedestrianised area, where you'll start to see cafes and coffees shops, places where people will linger, so they're capturing foot traffic, either local or because people are willing to park and walk.

Where people 'do' rather than just purchase. So with retail increasingly moving online, we can hopefully look forward to more people-friendly 'doing' space; but in the short term, there's bound to be a pro-parking, traffic uber alles, backlash, supported by businesses and politicians at various levels because they have to combat 'the death of retail'.

[drossall]

Road-side parking encourages the spawning of convenience stores (one is never enough, basically people don't want to walk more than two car lengths to get a lottery ticket) and fast-food franchises. The sort of shop that lets people dash in and out, with the minimum of hassle. They'll drive on to the next one if there's not a spot. You see this effect in any high street. Compare and contrast with any pedestrianised area, where you'll start to see cafes and coffees shops, places where people will linger, so they're capturing foot traffic, either local or because people are willing to park and walk.

That's interesting. Our town centre does pretty well in normal times. We're in a market town. One key street was "pedestrianised" ten or twenty years ago. Strictly, it's a motor-vehicle exclusion order, so bikes can ride through. We've got loads of cafes, and visiting cyclists are quite common.

[ian]

Road-side parking encourages the spawning of convenience stores (one is never enough, basically people don't want to walk more than two car lengths to get a lottery ticket) and fast-food franchises. The sort of shop that lets people dash in and out, with the minimum of hassle. They'll drive on to the next one if there's not a spot. You see this effect in any high street. Compare and contrast with any pedestrianised area, where you'll start to see cafes and coffees shops, places where people will linger, so they're capturing foot traffic, either local or because people are willing to park and walk.

That's interesting. Our town centre does pretty well in normal times. We're in a market town. One key street was "pedestrianised" ten or twenty years ago. Strictly, it's a motor-vehicle exclusion order, so bikes can ride through. We've got loads of cafes, and visiting cyclists are quite common.

We have a mostly 'drive-through' town which is gradually stumbling towards convenience-o-geddon. There's always going to limited parking on the high street (and it's all parking and traffic going elsewhere which, of course, most of it is) and most of it is taken by people 'grabbing stuff.' If you think a KFC is a major addition to a town's prosperity, job done. There is a pedestrian precinct which, while not the most enticing in the land, does have cafes and the sort of stores that ought to be on the high street. There's a notable difference.

[Wanlock Dod]

Although it isn’t mentioned in the article we all know that it was the cycle lanes that caused all of these high street shops to close.

[grams]

TfL have managed to lose a High Court case after banning general traffic (including taxis) from Bishopsgate.

The ruling decides that taxis are "public transport" and ought to be allowed to go the same places buses are, largely because of the possibility they might be carrying a disabled person.

The thing is the Bishopsgate scheme is shit that serves little or no function, since you can't get anywhere near it without diving into traffic, and people aren't commuting into central London anyway. The Euston Road and Park Lane cycle lane schemes are similarly pointlessly provocative.

Even though the ruling is about one specific scheme is casts a taxi-shaped shadow over every pedestrianisation, cycling and traffic reduction scheme.

Well done everyone.

[ian]

The main function of London taxis appears to be to sit there empty clogging up and polluting the streets (with a pricing structure that enables them to do this). I couldn't actually find a statistic for the proportion of time they're on the road but carrying no passengers, but I'm sure they're by far the most inefficient form of 'public' transport. They're public in the same way that public schools are.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Taxis are a sort of highly individualized public transport. "Public in the way that public schools are" is perhaps an exaggeration but a good summary. Most bus lanes can be used by taxis and I'm unclear what the point was of excluding them from this scheme. Especially as the photo shows a number of what appear to be private cars.

[grams]

I couldn't actually find a statistic for the proportion of time they're on the road but carrying no passengers

There's a statistic that something like 30-40% of *all* traffic in the CC zone is/was empty taxis. Very hard to google now.

Taxis are a sort of highly individualized public transport. "Public in the way that public schools are" is perhaps an exaggeration but a good summary. Most bus lanes can be used by taxis and I'm unclear what the point was of excluding them from this scheme.

I'd say most journeys they're being used like private cars for people too snobby to use our ample public transport, but I am a judgemental arsehole.

Especially as the photo shows a number of what appear to be private cars.

Being the BBC, that photo isn't of the Bishopsgate scheme, it's of one of the places pavements were widened to encourage social distancing, though very few people ever stepped off the original pavement.

99% sure it's Edgware Road.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Oh, typical BBC. In fact, typical of far more than just the BBC.

I've noticed here too that very few people step off the kerb into the widened pedestrian area. Possibly they think it's a cycle lane, or perhaps the kerb as a boundary is just too ingrained, I don't know.

[Wycombewheeler]

I couldn't actually find a statistic for the proportion of time they're on the road but carrying no passengers

There's a statistic that something like 30-40% of *all* traffic in the CC zone is/was empty taxis. Very hard to google now.

Taxis are a sort of highly individualized public transport. "Public in the way that public schools are" is perhaps an exaggeration but a good summary. Most bus lanes can be used by taxis and I'm unclear what the point was of excluding them from this scheme.

I'd say most journeys they're being used like private cars for people too snobby to use our ample public transport, but I am a judgemental arsehole.

Especially as the photo shows a number of what appear to be private cars.

Being the BBC, that photo isn't of the Bishopsgate scheme, it's of one of the places pavements were widened to encourage social distancing, though very few people ever stepped off the original pavement.

99% sure it's Edgware Road.

There is an argument that they connect the railways to peoples final destination,  such that people (like judges,  lawyers and politicians) will use the train to get into town or between cities. You know people who wouldn't use the bus or the tube with the masses. Or who might pretend to use the tube but make the return journey in a government jaguar.

And as such they are a vital public transport link. Not saying I am overly convinced by this,  but the decision makers will be.

[Cudzoziemiec]

I don't think any of the LTNs are around major stations though. And even if they were, you can still drive in them, just not through them. 

[ian]

I'm not anti-taxi, I just think they should be treated as private cars, which they essentially are.

In other news, a friend sent me this. The hair! The lack of helmets and lycra! The terrifying traffic! Awesome specs! Square cars!

A good demonstration that progress has been about as fast as I cycle.

[Kim]

I'm not anti-taxi, I just think they should be treated as private cars, which they essentially are.

Agreed, though I'd allow a bus lane exemption for bus-replacement taxis transporting a wheelchair user who's been fucked over by bus or train company incompetence (as happens with tedious regularity).

Taxi drivers wanting a free-for-all on the basis that they might at some point transport a disabled person can fuck off.  The traffic you're creating is a big part of why some disabled can't mobilise independently.

[ian]

Any scheme is blessed by a campaign by drivers who suddenly become very concerned about the disabled getting around, air pollution, and the progress of emergency vehicles.

Basically, all the things their activities have a negative impact on.

[grams]

Taxi drivers wanting a free-for-all on the basis that they might at some point transport a disabled person can fuck off.  The traffic you're creating is a big part of why some disabled can't mobilise independently.

Reading the shouty Nextdoor threads about the latest local LTN, there's an amazing assumption amongst both drivers and non-drivers that every car is either carrying a disabled person or making some other essential impossible-by-any-other-means journey.

Plus lots of people trying to sell the idea there were no traffic jams in London until 3 weeks ago.

(also a guy making a daily short journey by car saying the council ought to be sued for the pollution "traffic" was causing along his route...)

[Cudzoziemiec]

In other news, a friend sent me this. The hair! The lack of helmets and lycra! The terrifying traffic! Awesome specs! Square cars!

And the incredible length of the train in the background at the beginning!

[hatler]

Taxi drivers wanting a free-for-all on the basis that they might at some point transport a disabled person can fuck off.  The traffic you're creating is a big part of why some disabled can't mobilise independently.

Reading the shouty Nextdoor threads about the latest local LTN, there's an amazing assumption amongst both drivers and non-drivers that every car is either carrying a disabled person or making some other essential impossible-by-any-other-means journey.

Plus lots of people trying to sell the idea there were no traffic jams in London until 3 weeks ago.

(also a guy making a daily short journey by car saying the council ought to be sued for the pollution "traffic" was causing along his route...)

Shouty person on our ND complaining (without one scintilla of irony awareness) that it will prevent people taking their children to the local school by car, which they have to do, because of the heavy traffic that the LTN will doubtless cause. The local school has a catchment radius of about 500 yards. FFS.

[quixoticgeek]

One of Sustrans finest:

https://twitter.com/tom_a_jeffs/status/1358776832380833803

J