Forum Topic

Reports that TfL wins Bishopsgate appeal

Big news if true for active travel across London. Implications for The OC's JR against temporary Cycleway9 which was delayed pending result of the appeal. Likely secures future of the cycle lane on Chiswick High Road. Hopefully this encourages swift action from LBH&F to continue the protected lane through Hammersmith to Olympia.

Paul Campbell ● 1958d55 Comments

Hurrah, hurrah for common sense I say !

Chris Vessey ● 1958d

Excellent news Paul, but does that mean cyclists will stop using pavements ? It's really hazardous being a pedestrian in Chiswick.Btw for the enth time have you got rid of your car yet ? Why are you so shy about answering my question  ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 1958d

Sorry Loraine I'm not the spokesperson for the cycling community. Perhaps you could conduct a survey to get the answers you seek?Because I've answered it several times already months ago and I am under no obligation to keep answering it. I know you think it's some silver bullet and you are excited about it but it actually makes no sense to suggest that nobody who owns a car is allowed to support active travel schemes. If I were suggesting that nobody should be allowed to own a private car that would be a different matter. I've actually got a lovely new car and I am planning an exciting further extension to my fleet soon. I'll keep you updated on developments. I am very pleased you agree that this is excellent news!

Paul Campbell ● 1958d

Very promising and forward-looking. Active travel and Streetspace win at the ballot box and in the courts giving a strong mandate to push forward with more cycle lanes and LTNs:"This decision from the Court of Appeal is a vindication of our policies. Our world-leading Streetspace schemes are helping protect the health of Londoners, and this decision reinforces my determination to make it safer and easier for Londoners to walk and cycle, and to help ensure a green and sustainable recovery from the pandemic."The Judges' decision today, along with the vote on May 6th, is a double mandate allowing us to continue with our bold measures. Our changes to Bishopsgate make it safer for people walking and cycling. This central London scheme is the centrepiece of the work we have done across the capital during my first term. Recent data from TfL demonstrates its success, with 700 bikes per hour on average passing through the area at peak times - more than 11 bikes per minute".Whoever it was who predicted Cycleway 9 would be removed by August, updating David Kerr's prediction of April, may wish to revise their forecast.

Paul Campbell ● 1958d

“Our world leading StreetSpace schemes”Obviously Mayor Khan hasn’t traveled very extensively!

Ken Munn ● 1958d

"Our world-leading Streetspace schemes are helping protect the health of Londoners".Try taking a stroll around Hammersmith Broadway with it's almost totally unused "coned off for cyclists" lane which completely removes one lane of traffic all the way round.Or the idiotic "bike lane" heading West down the side of Shepherds Bush Green which has also resulted in the loss of one lane to ALL traffic.Both these wonderful Streetspace schemes have resulted in hugely delayed motor vehicles of all sorts which crawl along creating huge tail backs and pumping out far more harmful emissions than if the lanes weren't there.Definitely NOT protecting the health of Londoners. 

Derek Hill ● 1958d

Is it that drivers see their journeys as just more important than a mere cyclist? I think they often do, not realising that cleaners, doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers, bankers, cleaners, journalists, MPs cycle to work.

Stewart Jones ● 1958d

For may road users I suspect there is some ratio between the perceived 'value' of a journey, and the purchase price of the vehicle making it.

Ken Munn ● 1958d

Not at all.  The Hammersmith Broadway setup is absurd for all road users. Motor vehicles which include lots of buses passing through the Broadway, have lost the use of a lane which is giving rise to more pollution than ever before while almost all cyclists DO NOT travel around the Broadway, they cut across junctions. Who in their right mind would cycle from Shepherds Bush Road or from Olympia and travel around the Broadway in order to get to King Street?By the way your list of workers drive cars as well and I would bet most would take the Tube to get to work.

Derek Hill ● 1958d

So the choice is get the tube, train or bus, cycle, walk or if you choose to drive with the aircon on , listening to the radio then run the risk of being stuck in traffic. I’m not knocking it. I’ve chosen to drive on occasion  when the other options would have been ok. Twenty years ago I thought nothing of driving into the West End for the theatre, shopping or just a coffee.  But I wouldn’t now. And you might well find the Hammersmith Broadway set up absurd and you might very well be right but it can change.Your last comment about the list of workers rather makes my point.

Stewart Jones ● 1958d

That's how I got to and from work today, it's directly on the main route for cycling from Chiswick to Central London. I agree it's a crap arrangement, but better than nothing, and needs a proper permanent scheme.

John Hall ● 1958d

It's coming. No more inaccessible ring-of-death; proper separated lane to the Slytherin of London Council's border and mounting pressure.

Paul Campbell ● 1958d

Ken, Well in that case a bike I could buy costs £12k so that would make me far more important on the road than a mere motorist who is renting his car. Perverse = motoring.

Chris Vessey ● 1957d

Many years ago I worked just opposite Liverpool St station and from mid-Spring to mid-Autumn, subject to weather, I would cycle to work - I was a lot younger and a lot fitter then!Back then the area was a significant hub for legal, accountancy, finance and similar professional firms.  The attraction of being next to Liverpool St Station was huge. Since then a lot of the firms have moved out to Canary Wharf area to follow their clients but there are still a lot of those types of firm in that area.The implementation of the scheme, if it becomes permanent and it has to be noted that TfL have said it will only be there whilst social distancing restrictions remain in force, will ensure that the professional firms still in the area move out.  Professional people generally do not cycle to meetings but instead will take a taxi which is now banned from the area.The area will become a economic backwater, presumably that is what Khan and TfL want

Justin Stephenson ● 1957d

Justin, I think you are a bit out of touch with what has been happening in the City over the last few years.There has been widespread improvement of streets for walking and cycling and reduction in motor traffic.  For example, pedestrianisation around Leadenhall Street, removal of motor traffic except buses at Bank Junction.These changes aren't being driven by TfL but by the City of London Corporation.  They know that for the City to survive and thrive in a world where working remotely is becoming easier, it needs to be a place where people actually want to work and like going to.  That means making the streets better for walking and cycling, not a traffic sewer.There is also diversification beyond financial services as an area for tech startups, particularly heading up towards Hoxton and Old St.People may think of the City of London Corporation as being very conservative but their plans to reduce motor traffic in the area have been far more radical than any other London borough.  It is likely because they are so hard headed about what is needed and don't have NIMBY residents complaining about inconvenience to driving.

Michael Robinson ● 1957d

I work there Justin in one of the most prominent buildings and I know Councillors in the City of London Corporation. There is a long-term plan to remove traffic from the City and the politicans and businesses are very supportive. They are supporting the pedestrianisation of Bank despite very aggressive opposition from the cabbies, the proliferation of new cycle lanes and one way streets on Threadneedle etc and much more. The Bishopsgate scheme has got the headlines because it is a TfL road but it is just a small part of the reallocation of space to walking and cycling that the Corporation has implemented. And Bishopsgate is much more focused on walking with pavement build-outs than it is on cycling for which there is no special provision. People in Chiswick complaining about the cycle lane would be shocked by what has happened in the last 15 months in the City. The Corporation and the leaders of businesses are switched on and very progressive.You know why it is happening? The City of London Corporation has done the numbers and consulted with the businesses and the vast majority of workers arrive by train and tube and then on foot, numbers arriving by bike are increasing dramatically and most businesses in flagship buildings are under pressure from their workforces to expand cycle storage and shower facilities to satisfy the increased demand which the pandemic has accelerated. My company is working on plans to radically expand cycling facilities due to survey feedback from the workforce.The vast majority of people then move about within the City during the day between offices for meetings on foot. The City of London Corporation knows that too much space has been given to cars passing through and their projections show that they need much more space on the streets for people on foot, especially when Crossrail arrives. Developers of new office buildings have had to include closure of streets and replacement of them with piazzas and cycle lanes in their plans in order to receive approval.Times change and your interpretation of what is happening and the outcomes is very dated I am sorry to say. The City is a far more pleasant place than it was 20 years ago and it is getting better with every new people-focused development.

Paul Campbell ● 1957d

The cab drivers will appeal Bishopsgate.  People who want London to be more like the countryside will find that, like the countryside, business is in very short supply.  I'm with Andy Burnham on this. If you want the countryside, move there.

Claire Moran ● 1957d

Other way around.  If you want to drive and park where ever you want, best move out of London.ULEZ coming in a few months to further restrict driving in London, for example.

Michael Robinson ● 1957d

The ULEZ doesn’t restrict driving. It just makes people with the most polluting vehicles pay for the privilege of poisoning their neighbourhoods. In fact non compliant vehicles should be banned from London because this isn’t the countryside - there are 6000 people per sq kilometre and you just have to think about other people a bit more if you live here.

Ed Saper ● 1957d

If you think most senior professionals (and not so senior) with offices in Fleet Street or Temple walk or cycle to meetings in Bishopsgate or vice versa then you clearly know different set of people to me. Of course people walk from one meeting to another when the offices are reasonably close - but they have done that for decades.I have no issue with cars other than taxis being removed from the area - except for the few people who actually live there.  But if you also ban taxis the companies with offices there will vote with their feet. It will of course take a few years for the relocation to be completed but it will be substantially completed within 10 years. No doubt the empty buildings will find replacement tenants but far less lucrative than the top end professional & finance firms which will impact on other businesses in the locality.

Justin Stephenson ● 1957d

I'd back the City of London Corporation's judgement on this one.(Of course, Brexit hasn't helped)

Ken Munn ● 1957d

The businesses have asked for the taxis to be removed from the City's major streets and junctions. They have been consulted and their senior leaders have asked for it. Taxis can still get around the city but they are barred from driving through parts of it. It started with Lime Street, continued with Bank, is extended to Bishopsgate and there are plans for more major thoroughfares to follow.Senior professionals get the tube for the distances you mention. When I first worked here 20+years ago the execs had chauffeurs in luxury company cars waiting for them outside the office to whisk them to wherever they wished to go including home. Now the execs take public transport. I work with these people. I know them well. This isn't about us moving in different circles; this is about is moving in different times. My worldview is current and yours is the past.

Paul Campbell ● 1957d

As I said Justin, you are out of date.The City of London Corporation has representatives from and consult with all the major businesses in the area and wouldn't be doing this if the businesses themselves didn't want it.

Michael Robinson ● 1957d

Clare, you too are stuck in the past. Wise up and move forward into the future. If I can do it, so can you.

Chris Vessey ● 1957d

Chris, your comments are foolish and patronising.  Fortunately there are not that many people on the forum now whose posts I don't read but you are now one of them.

Claire Moran ● 1957d

Why would they want that?

Stewart Jones ● 1957d

Claire Moran, you are such a cruel woman !

Chris Vessey ● 1956d

Transport threads are the best.  Some classics on here.  "My worldview is current and yours is the past" is one of my favourites.  It's always good to toot your own trumpet.

Kieran Fox ● 1956d

Yes it's fun isn't it? I like the thread where a man who thinks that LTNs and cycle lanes are too authoritarian argues that the solution is to nationalise the satellite navigation technology industry and force consumers to use a state-owned monopoly. Genius.

Paul Campbell ● 1956d

Chris, such a shame Claire won't read your rejoinder.

Ken Munn ● 1956d

You can see when someone is shouting as they type, shouldn’t it be in capitals?The thread on technology and transport was just an opinion.  I think in the future it could offer solutions to some of the issues we have.I don’t think the cycle lane has been implemented well, so I think it should be removed.  But I would like to see a well designed and implemented cycle lane put back in in its place (which I believe is the plan).I thought that closing Devonshire Road was as mistake (I live just off it).  But actually, on the odd occasion we use our car, when we go home down Brackley Road, it's fine, it never seems that busy.  So I’ve changed my mind on that one.I’m not always right and can change my mind.Paul, your posts give the impression that your opinions are always right and the only ones that count.You suggest that people that disagree with you are extremists, and some are, but it seems there are extremists on both sides of the argument.I think I agree with some of the infrastructure changes you want, what I don't agree with is your approach.I also don't agree with how people on the other side of the argument try and get their message across.  But we are all a bit old for the "He said it first" argument.

Kieran Fox ● 1956d

Smiling when I typed it not shouting. I'd been waiting for my moment. And I enjoy the game.I don't think I do call everyody who disagrees with me extremists. I haven't called you an extremist and I don't think that you are one. The founders of The OC (Frew & O'Donnell) and some of its most vocal members (Giles and Pearson), Redesign CS9 (Lesniak) and two of the nine Chiswick Councillors are extreme car supremacists. Jeremy is not an extremist. But his views on what is happning in the City and who supports are it are a couple of decades past their sell-by-date.Of course it is your perogative to object to my approach. I note that.

Paul Campbell ● 1956d

A balanced reply, but would you consider yourself an extremist Paul?

Kieran Fox ● 1956d

No. I don't think that advocating for cycle lanes on main roads or for putting in restrictions on residential roads that are blighted by a seriously high volumes of traffic that they weren't built to cope with is extremist. I don't think that some residents having to drive a different route that takes a few mins longer so that more streets are made safe and quiet is extreme. I don't think that advocating for Devonshire Road to remain a no-through road for traffic is extreme. I genuinely believe that slight inconvenience and a safer and more pleasant environment will encourage more people to walk and cycle on short local journeys. I used to use my car regularly for shopping trips to the High Road and to take the kids places locally and I have entirely eliminated that use of it over the last few years. We have adpated, bought a suitable utility bike for every day errands, and the benefits of doing this have been great for us as a family. Plus it is one less car getting in the way of everybody else.What is happening in the City is much more extreme than anything I have campaigned for or advocated for locally in Chiswick. Every one way street has a contraflow cycle lane for example. Major throughfares have been made one way with the remaining half of the road dedicated to walking and cycling. Junctions have been filled in and turned into paizzas. I honestly do know people who have been influential in decision-making and driving those street changes and they are sober experienced successful business leaders and realists who have formed firm judgments on how beneficial traffic restrictions will be to the City. I agree with them and the results of everything they have done so far has justified their intentions. Whenever cars are removed from an area more businesses come in and footfall increases. It is a simple RoI calculation for them.Most serious politicians agree with all of this including the national government, the Mayor and our local authorities. And of course most senior politicians agree with it in other large economies such as France, Spain, Italy, Germany, the US (now under Biden) leaving aside the Nordics and the Netherlands that are way ahead of all of us on this and many other things. It is so obviously progressive that it transcends politics with leaders of all stripes supporting and driving it.I think my views are mainstream and popular and every poll conducted so far supports that.Also I don't support every aspect of every scheme that is implemented. I choose a different way of providing fedback to decision-makers that is supportive and constructive and consistently yields far-better results than the confrontational approach that our local Conservatives have adopted and become trapped in. The approach the OC is taking has been doomed from the start as should have been obvious after the collapse of the ReDesign CS9 campaign. People have to accept that change is necessary and that it will happen if they want to be part of the mainstream movement and influence the outcomes.

Paul Campbell ● 1956d

Paul, a thoughtful response and I agree with most of it.  But this sort of balanced response isn't what is coming out from both sides normally, and sorry, but I am including you in that.  It's often divisive and it loses the people in the middle.Changes have to be made and change is difficult, more so for some than others.  But the changes that have been made are not always perfect and can be improved, or even, in some cases removed.  Acknowledging this helps people accept change and feel included in the decision.

Kieran Fox ● 1956d

Yes Ken such a shame poor woman, he he LOL !

Chris Vessey ● 1956d

I have engaged with many people in real life with lots of different opinions on transport and had sensible discussions about changes. The vast majority of people are not actually that interested, some don't want change but accept it has to happen, some have good suggestions on ways to make change work. Most people just want to understand what is happening and why. They want straightforward objective communication and are frustrated with both the Council who have been very poor comunnicators and the local Councillors who have been too partisan and entrenched in their confrontational stance on transport to pass on reliable information to them. There are only a few nerds like me who have read the detail and spent time absorbing the processes and procedures.The people you see me engage with on social media like this forum tend to be the more extreme car supremacists. As I said on another thread it a misonception that consensus is requied to drive change. These are people who will never be convinced that anything that negatively impacts cars to any degree whatsoever can possibly be acceptable. They will try to exploit any admission of weakness of a scheme to destroy everything and halt progress. And yes I freely admit that I am not polite to them and that I enjoy pointing out when they are making unsubstantiated claims or calling them out on their anti-cycling bigotry and ludicrous conspiracy theories. The worst of them like David Lesniak I just ignore entirely. Every area of London has its Lesniaks. All the Lesniaks have been engaged with directly by politicans, campaigners and transport professionals up to the point where nobody engages with them any longer because it is exhausting, pointless and unpleasant. They just get left behind. That is a fact of life in business, politics and society in general. It is where The OC is heading fast if they haven't already got there. They cause so much damage to their reputations that they exclude themselves entirely from any future debate on local matters.

Paul Campbell ● 1956d

"But the changes that have been made are not always perfect"Please show me any engineering project that delivers "perfection"!Every project ends up being a compromise.  "It's not perfect" becomes yet another objection.You could see that with the original CW9 plans that took some space from pavement and there were calls of 'Don't take space from pavement, take it from the road!'.  Then along comes the temporary design which doesn't take space from pavement but takes it from the road and there are then complaints about that as well.I can confidently predict that any design that reallocated any space for cycling would have received objections. The most objections would have been for a cycle lane along both sides of CHR because that would have had the most impact of any of the possible designs for a protected bike lane there.

Michael Robinson ● 1956d

You might restrict driving but you are just pushing it elsewhere, if that'swhat you want, cannot quite understand the reasoning, what we needis new form of transport for those who cannot cycle.  The ULEZ is onceagain not good for the elderly as they cannot access places if they don'thave compliant vehicle, unless they are exempt from ULEZ

Janice Evans ● 1956d

Paul, can't you see what you have just done in your response?  You started by pointing out how you approach the issues and work with the information you have to try and achieve a goal.  You then name somebody you seem not to like and disagree with and carry out a character assassination.  Why?  It's just not productive.  It comes across as bullying.  That is what I was trying to point out before and the argument that "He said it first" just doesn't cut it.

Kieran Fox ● 1956d

Like I say it is your perogative to disagree with my aporoach. You aren't my Line Manager or Dad though so I don't have to listen to you! In change you segment your population and develop your tactics for the different segment. Sidelining is a tactic used for one of the segments.Incidentally, saying that people stop engaging with people like Lesniak or The OC because it gets to a point where it is unpleasant is not a characater assassination. I would need to explain why it is unpleasant for that to be the case.

Paul Campbell ● 1956d

Not sure what you're saying here? Will people who can't drive into London be pushed into Birmingham instead? Or to Slough? 

John Hall ● 1956d

Enough said.

Mark Talbot ● 1956d

Ha, they cannot afford new vehicles and cannot get around without them.

Janice Evans ● 1956d

Says one of the people who will never accept any change that negatively impacts on cars. You can be a player or you can be a referee but you don't get to be both. Here are some of Mark's considered opinions on change:"Anyone with a bit of common sense can see these cycle lanes are a disaster waiting to happen as we come out of house arrest.""Need to get him [Grant Shapps]along CHR, TGT, Fishers Lane & Devonshire Rd a bit quick to see what a khazi Hounslow & Ealing councils have made of our once lovely area whilst ruining many businesses in the process.""CHR is a complete joke now, you can't squeeze a quart into a pint pot as they have tried and failed. One would hope common sense would prevail and it returned to it's former self but seeing as that would involve a number of people at fortress Lampton admitting they were wrong we best not hold our breath.""Can’t wait for even more hard working CHR retail businesses to go bust as a consequence. But it’ll be ok a few bikes can use it instead and we all drive to Westfield to shop.""It's probably the only brand [Five Guys]that felt strong enough to contend with being cut off by a cycle highway outside it's front door.""I’d say simply common sense. More traffic through Glebe Estate = increase in pollution. Call it old fashioned but gut feel often better than no end of research IMO.""If this cycle lane is built down CHR then IMO it will have a detrimental effect on the shops, restaurants and other commercial uses along CHR and even more concerning is it would simply cause utter havoc on Glebe Estate and the surrounding roads .... put to one side your car hating hat and think of the people that live in these densely populated streets ..... sorry it's just bonkers!"And so on and so on ad nauseam .....

Paul Campbell ● 1956d

Janice there is a new form of transport, it's called the e-scooter. Designed especially for nimble folk such as thee !

Chris Vessey ● 1956d

Chris, ignoring problems does not resolve them.

Janice Evans ● 1956d

And what's your suggestion for the 'not so nimble' ? Also shopping using a e-scooter ? Seriously 🤣🤣🤣

Loraine Pemberton ● 1956d

Loraine, you just stay as you are, you'll be fine as you are now. If you need help please let me know and I shall whip down and do your shopping for you. Best wishes.an e-scooter might suit you !

Chris Vessey ● 1956d

"The cab drivers will appeal Bishopsgate."They have done. They lost.

Ken Munn ● 1956d

ReDesign CS9 = extreme car supremacist? Maths not a strong suit I see, nor is reading comprehension.Not to worry, Paul. All along I've said the same thing. Evolving street space is an urban design issue. Sadly you don't and won't and can't understand that. Even your example of Central Park missed the mark. Olmstead was a visionary and, get this, he allowed for cars to exist in an urban environment. Poorly retrofitting cycling infrastructure does not a pleasant urban space make. Simply look at CHR. But you know all this. Anyone with half a brain can see it. Now if you came along with a grand scheme to coordinate and liaise with LBHF and redesign all of King Street and CHR for all manner of transport then that would be something to get behind. Oh wait, I've said that before...

David Lesniak ● 1956d

Nope, they can appeal this latest nonsense.

Claire Moran ● 1956d

a

Chris Vessey ● 1956d

Very kind of you to spend all that time collating all those tremendously valid points I’ve made over the past few months. I would never have had the inclination to spend so much time doing that so thank you, much appreciated.

Mark Talbot ● 1956d

They'll have to go to the Supreme Court to do so.

Ken Munn ● 1956d