More big increases in cycling

[Earl Aelfheah]

19 minutes ago, first mate said:

To simply to say I am not interested is a swerve because you have also said you ideally want parking removed from bus lanes. If you want this to happen locally you would probably have to oppose local CPZ plans- as those state parking will not be removed.

I don't' get this point. I should oppose a scheme that doesn't impact parking on lordship lane in any way, on the ground of it's impact on parking on Lordship Lane? How about I just support the removal of parking on lordship lane, as I do?

19 minutes ago, first mate said:

On other matters I have responded to some of your questions; I suspect you did not get the answers you wanted. TBH, I am more interested in road design and traffic interventions at local level.

No, you haven't. Why don't you just say what you think? Do you agree with the report Travel Watch produced? You seemed to think their words should be given great weight, but now are being coy. What is your view on bike lanes - do you want them removed? You've spoken about them a lot on this thread, but seem like Rockets to fall back on innuendo, instead of stating a firm opinion.

On 'local level interventions' - do you support the removal of parking on Lordship Lane, making the bus lanes 24/7 and enforcing them more strictly, or is your concern about bus times just 'theoretical' (or perhaps only relevant in so far as it can be used to rail against people travelling by bicycle)?

Edited 9 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

I have listened to the session and already shared my views. As I said, I am most interested in local impacts. In the case of LL the CPZ plan as proposed by Southwark stated that parking on LL would not be affected or removed, this was to ensure visitors in cars had somewhere to park and businesses would be supported in terms of customers using cars/ vehicles.

I am not clear now whether you think bus speeds on LL are an issue or not? I had thought you were asking for parking on LL to be removed in order to improve bus speeds. Is that the case or not? If it is then you have to disagree with the Council CPZ plan to leave visitor parking on LL intact- it is there in black and white.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Yes it’s the case That I would like to see the reallocation of parking space.

Edited 9 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

There has been an analysis, by Travel Watch - their report was submitted to the London Assembly and they were invited to speak. You seem to want to ignore their recommendations. Why?

What is it that you are calling for with regards bike lanes exactly? Are you calling for their removal?

@Earl Aelfheah you are sharing a Travel Watch report from November 2024 and linking it a meeting in December 25 the London Assembly called to discuss the continuing downward trends of bus speeds in the report you highlighted the 43% cycle sector growth in published in November 25. The way you have worded the above suggests that Travel Watch submitted that report in response to the meeting the London Assembly called recently. They did not. I am sure they stand by what they said in that report but they did not cite it in relation to the items being discussed during the recent meeting. I think you are conflating the two things and creating a misleading impression.

All I think a lot of people are calling for is a more pragmatic approach to London-wide traffic issues - that you have to be careful to balance all modes as there is no point robbing Peter to pay Paul.

14 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Yes it’s the case That I would like to see the reallocation of parking space.

Perfect timing. Is that the pragmatic approach?

[Earl Aelfheah]

11 minutes ago, Rockets said:

All I think a lot of people are calling for is a more pragmatic approach to London-wide traffic issues

What does that mean? You regularly kick up dust. So you imply (always insinuation), that cycle lanes are a major factor in congestion and in slowing buses.... and? Are you saying they should be rolled back?

Are you saying that they have been successful in growing cycling numbers, or are you sticking to the position that they have minimal impact?

Do you agree with the recommendations made by Travel Watch regarding how to speed up buses in their report?

What is your view on these matters?

[Rockets]

What it means is that some people are calling for a more pragmatic and balanced approach to London-wide traffic matters. 

I have made my views very clear on this and, if was not clear before, my personal opinion is that TFL and the Mayor's office have over-indexed on cycling to the neglect of other transport modes in the capital. That after all the hubris to proclaim what a success their transport policies have been that actually the data is starting to show that there are problems.

In the last few weeks the London Assembly has called expert witnesses to discuss two key topics: why is TFL missing their walking targets and why are buses running slower than ever before - both concerns which were  in a report that TFL and the Mayor's office heralded the 43% increase in cycle sectors since 2019 - which was the main headline of the press releases sent to publicise it.

[first mate]

@Earl Aelfheah said to Rockets:

"So you imply (always insinuation), that cycle lanes are a major factor in congestion and in slowing buses".

But the LA session said some cycle lanes are a factor, didn't they? So you are quibbling over whether this applies to all cycle lanes? I do not believe anyone has claimed that. You are also, I think, quibbling over use of the word "major". I do not remember if the session experts claimed they were a major factor, I believe they did not qualify in that way as either major or minor, but simply mentioned this as one factor alongside other factors, which we have already itemised. I am glad you have now changed from use of "the major" to "a major".