Forum Topic

Why bikes lanes don't make traffic worse.

A handy and easy-to-follow 5 minute video explaining why bikes lanes don't make traffic worse for those who have fallen for the debunked idea that reducing road space increases congestion. Featuring gratuitous shots of cycling in London and how the Westway failed to alleviate traffic problems in West London, instead making them much worse. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/video/2022/may/17/why-new-bike-lanes-dont-cause-traffic-jams-video

Paul Campbell ● 1586d105 Comments

So you've popped your head up again over the parapet, but surely you owe an apology to someone for your untruthful and libellous statement about them ? Man up Mr Campbell and do the honourable thing.

Loraine Pemberton ● 1586d

The argument is often made that car travel is essential for economic growth. However, between 1999 and 2009, traffic in London fell 8.7% while London's economy grew 31.2% and population grew by 10.8%. From 2009 to 2019 London's economy grew by 36% and population grew by 14%. However, traffic grew by 21%, almost all of it on minor roads.



While Amazon and Uber have certainly played their part, I would argue that it is Google Maps (launched end of 2005) which opened up additional road capacity for drivers and induced additional demand.

Ed Saper ● 1586d

Agreed Ed. Traffic volumes had been tempered by more people using main roads. Google Maps and subsequent apps opened up vast swathes of urban residential roads to cars. The fightback is well underway.

Paul Campbell ● 1586d

2010 was the first year traffic started climbing on minor roads. Here's the uptake of satellite navigation:

Tom Pike ● 1586d

Ah, you will see here, pupils of the Tom Pike school of statistics.

Maggie Dodge ● 1586d

Josh Toussaint-Strauss and an Excel graph. Sad.

Russell Pearson ● 1586d

Uh huh. How do the militant car zealots keep on losing the argument? It's a mystery when Russ "Taliban" Pearson offers such a compelling counter-argument.

Paul Campbell ● 1586d

The thing is car lanes haven't changes from hammersmith to chiswick roundabot so it's not relavent.  Do we have a 5 minutes video explaining what happens when a bus lane is converted to a cycle lane and what effect that has on bus journey times? That would interesting to know.

Nik Solomon ● 1586d

Ah not that easy-to-follow after after all. For the drivers at the back of the class here is a synopsis of the video: more space for motor vehicles = more motor vehicles (more road deaths and injuries, more emissions, more pollution, more congestion); less space for motor vehicles = fewer motor vehicles (fewer road deaths and injuries, fewer emissions, less pollution, less congestion). Drivers who care about buses can take personal responsibility to improve bus journey times. Don't drive your car for short local journeys so that you don't get in the way of buses. Take the bus, walk or cycle instead. And use the six lane motorway that was built at great expense through Chiswick exclusively for the benefit of drivers for your longer car journeys. In your case Nik, following this advice will have additional amplified benefits for non-car users of Chiswick Mall.

Paul Campbell ● 1586d

Many people still don't want to risk covid by taking public transport. And bus journeys are much slower due to the impact of the barely used cycle lane.For very many people, walking or cycling more than very short distances is not an option due yo health reasons particularly if they have to carry anything heavy. But you really don't care  do you  Paul, about any of that.

Claire Moran ● 1586d

The NHS has made of very clear that if more people walked and cycled there would be less people who reach a stage of their life where that would be harder for them, and the burden on the health services would be greatly reduced. And it would be polite if us able bodied car owners drove less on local journeys to free up road space for those who need to. Hard to see a downside really apart from a few peoples' whining. 

John Hall ● 1586d

Paul, so basically you have no answer of the impact of removing bus lanes for a cycle lane.  I always walk or use public transport where possible.  So you say "take the bus, walk or cycle instead".  I went to get the bus the other day, it was so slow I got off and walked the mile and a half instead. I was going to a meeting, if it was raining I wouldn't off been able to do this and would of had to stay on the bus.  The here and now is buses have been impacted and if anything push people into cars because people think.  Why sit on a bus which had a speed advantage in a bus lane when I can sit in my own car and travel at the same speed.

Nik Solomon ● 1586d

'Why sit on a bus which had a speed advantage in a bus lane when I can sit in my own car and travel at the same speed.'Or using your Sat Nav in your car you can get there more quickly by using residential roads!

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1586d

No Nik I have answered the question but you haven't understood the answer because you haven't realised who is causing delays to buses and vulnerable people who are car-dependent even though you identify them in your post and even though you are a self-confessed culprit yourself:"The here and now is buses have been impacted and if anything push people into cars because people think.  Why sit on a bus which had a speed advantage in a bus lane when I can sit in my own car and travel at the same speed."i.e. all the able-bodied drivers who selfishly occupy the road space that could be left for buses and people who are genuinely dependent on motor vehicles for their journeys. Two other salient points here:1. There are extensive roadworks affecting all road users at the moment. Bike users are the most affected and the least complaining. When these are finished there will be much more space for active travel and that will generate the results described in the video and we will all benefit from that for many years to come2. The magic bus lane of car-drivers dreams was never continuous and had limited  hours. The former meant that buses had to rejoin the car lanes and that meant the A315 was always reduced to the capacity of a single lane anyway; the latter meant that drivers parked in the bus lanes in Chiswick after 6pm and on Sundays, blocking them. It is always drivers who block and delay buses however you look at it.

Paul Campbell ● 1586d

I think you should of studied comprehension more at school.  I am not a self confessed culprit."I always walk or use public transport where possible" I said."buses have been impacted and if anything push people into cars because people think.  Why sit on a bus which had a speed advantage in a bus lane when I can sit in my own car and travel at the same speed.", here I say "People think. why sit in my car"... People, as in other people I have not said I do that.  So please pay attention at the back!

Nik Solomon ● 1586d

Traffic includes deliveries, cabs and emergency transport.

Janice Evans ● 1586d

Claire, Paul is a wind up, people don't drive unless they have to, why would they.

Janice Evans ● 1586d

Bus mileage in London has been in steady decline since 2010 (39% fall) and largely tracks declines in usage. 2019 London bus & coach mileage (290m miles) was the lowest since 1994 (282m miles). As congestion increases, buses become slower, which reduces demand for buses and some of that is going to move to cars and taxis, which further increases congestion and reduces demand again.

Ed Saper ● 1586d

It's your Chiswick Mall thread that contains your confession. My degree in English Literature taught me to link content from different sources to draw conclusions and form arguments."I live here, and I have to use my car to get kids to train stations, football matches etc etc all time sensitive."Notwithstanding all your other comments on that thread that outed you as a particularly impatient frequent car user who asserts ownership of road space and priority for private vehicles.

Paul Campbell ● 1586d

Apologies — that's a 23% fall 2010 to 2019.  39% includes the pandemic year of 2020.

Ed Saper ● 1586d

But these journeys can only be done by car in our circumstance. otherwise I walk or use public transport.  hence the statement "I have to use my car"

Nik Solomon ● 1586d

And these are journeys nowhere near the high road, cycle lanes!

Nik Solomon ● 1586d

If there is space to have a cycle lane,  wouldn't there be space to have a dedicated bus lanes on either side of Chiswick High Road instead?  Maybe be a physical barrier to ensure no car use it at any time, and if not a barrier it could be camera monitored.  Bikes could use it, but it wouldn't be as safe for them as a dedicated cycle lane. That would reduce the capacity or cars in the same way as the cycle lane would so car use should, based on the evidence, fall.  Also the bus service should be much better increasing bus use and further reducing car use.

Kieran Fox ● 1585d

"If there is space to have a cycle lane,  wouldn't there be space to have a dedicated bus lanes on either side of Chiswick High Road instead? "Not really, recommended width for a bi-directional bike lane is 4m which is the same as a bus lane, so bus lanes in both directions would take up twice as much as the bike lane (recommended figures... in the real world, widths can be narrower...)Two 'with flow' bike lanes would take up more space than a bi-directional lane as both 'with flow' lanes need space for overtaking and there are two sets of kerbing/separation instead of one.As mentioned, you just need to look at historical views of Chiswick High Rd on Google Streetview to see there was never continuous bus lane along the route and it went down to one lane in both directions at three locations.Measures such as a bus gate to give buses priority at junctions always seem to attract howls of complaints as well...

Michael Robinson ● 1585d

So a bus lane in one directions then, the whole length of the high street not piecemeal as it was before.  Also have it camera enforced.  I don't think bus lane cameras were ever in place?  Would that be possible?  If so, wouldn't that be more cost effective to implement and serve a bigger percentage of the population?  Do more people use buses than bikes, or would they?  That would both reduce the available road space for cars to the same degree as the cycle lane and increase (at least one way) the reliability of busses.

Kieran Fox ● 1585d

"Recommended width for a bi-directional bike lane is 4m"Pity Michael you advocated for the 2.5m width recently installed.Always enjoy the irony of so-called advocates agitating for less/sub-standard while those dubbed anti advocated for achieving the regulations set forth in the guidelines and then some.

David Lesniak ● 1585d

Kieran, they don't want the busses to be reliable, it was once stated on here that they want to make money out of motorists.  The bike lane couldhave been on the path one side, they are on the path anyhow all the time.If they wanted people out of cars, the bus would have been the most important form of transport.

Janice Evans ● 1585d

"Measures such as a bus gate to give buses priority at junctions always seem to attract howls of complaints as well..."In the past I have chatted to bus drivers standing opposite the bus garage whilst we wait for their/ my bus to come.Which out exception they hate the bus gate in CHR.

Adrian Irving ● 1585d

The problem the pro cycling lobby is that they have little man syndrome. It’s a minority activity pursued mainly by white, middle aged men. It’s why active travel always has walking included, because it bumps the numbers up, yet minimal money is spent on improving pavements.And once all cars and other vehicles go electric the pollution argument disappears.

Simon Hayes ● 1585d

"The problem the pro cycling lobby is that they have little man syndrome."There's a lot of little men driving big cars!"It’s a minority activity pursued mainly by white, middle aged men."In the UK that's broadly correct - between 2015 and 2019 men did 2.5 times as many trips and 4 times the mileage as women.  More white people than black people cycle, although, by number of trips, the younger you are, the more trips you make for travel, but middle age people cycle more for leisure.In 1990, 50% of women had driving licenses vs 80% of men.  Now it is 71% of women and still 80% of men. So these things change and the stereotypes tend to disappear over time. During 2020, the number of trips women cycled increased by 50% and the miles travelled more than doubled - men still did 2 times as many trips, but the gap reduced significantly. With the provision of safe cycling infrastructure there's no reason why the gender gap would persist - there isn't one in the Netherlands for instance. 

Ed Saper ● 1584d

Ed ignores two key factors: culture and demographics. In the Netherlands they abide by cycle way design best practice. Here, as Robinson demonstrates, the Brits do not. For instance.

David Lesniak ● 1584d

Ah, the old percentages arguments. Always the sign of desperation. The numbers of cyclists is minute compared to the population of London. Come up with all the percentages you like, but the numbers will always be low.More people will walk than cycle for local trips, particularly if they will be carrying bulky items on the return trip. You don’t need an expensive bike to walk. Most people I know do indeed walk for local journeys where they aren’t either a) returning with a lot of stuff, b) aren’t continuing their journeys on elsewhere or c) are physically capable of doing so.But very little is spent on improving pavements or improving street lighting, particularly in comparison to what’s spent on cycling infrastructure.And ironically those really keen cyclists don’t use the cycle lanes because the less proficient cyclists get in the way and slow them down!Admit it, you just want the roads to yourselves!

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

"It's a mystery when Russ "Taliban" Pearson..."Offensive in the extreme Mr Campbell, you liken Russell to an extremist, fanatical murderous group ? You really think that's the way to win a debate ? You're a very sad and bitter person, many might comment you're in need of professional help. However, I couldn't possibly comment.

Loraine Pemberton ● 1584d

Says Chiswicks very own "Taliban" Cycling Imam - hey Paul "whats sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander" Ring any bells re your post about Russell ? Apology herewith in the unlikely event you're offended or anyone else is, but hey you opened that door 😉

Loraine Pemberton ● 1584d

" The numbers of cyclists is minute compared to the population of London. Come up with all the percentages you like, but the numbers will always be low."OK, I'll give you some percentages and translate those into numbers.If you look at how people get to work in London, the share of cycling is increasing and the share of cars is decreasing.London commutes by modal share (%) and number of people (in millions)2010 - Cars 34% (1.325m), Bikes 5% (0.206m)2019 - Cars 27% (1.303m), Bikes 5% (0.230m)Q4 2020 - Cars 27% (1.265m), Bikes 7% (0.335m)In Inner London in 2020 more people (241,000 vs 215,000) commuted to work by bike than by car.2010 - Cars 16% (0.246m), Bikes 8% (0.130m)2019 - Cars 14% (0.274m), Bikes 7% (0.145m)Q4 2020 - Cars 11% (0.215m), Bikes 12% (0.241m)Outer London hasn't moved much yet, but new infrastructure will fix that:2010 - Cars 46% (1.071m), Bikes 3% (0.078m)2019 - Cars 38% (1.027m), Bikes 4% (0.085m)Q4 2020 - Cars 38% (1.032m), Bikes 4% (0.1m)If you wish to frame the argument as one group wanting the roads to themselves, it would surely be car drivers as they endless demand the removal of bike lanes, the removing of traffic restrictions, expansion of parking, restriction of bus lanes and more roads - to themselves.And given that cars and vehicles take up so much more space and cause so much congestions, that's perhaps understandable.However, cycling takes up a fraction of the space - the Blackfriars cycling lane carries 5 times as many people as cars during the morning peak - or 2,000 cyclists in the space of 1 traffic lane vs 1,557 drivers and passengers over 2 traffic lanes.  It also take a lot less space to park a bike than a car!So, no, it isn't true to say that cyclists "want the roads to yourselves".  They don't need them, they just want to share them safely and not be killed or injured in the process. 

Ed Saper ● 1584d

"There's a lot of little men driving big cars!"Ed, surely you're not referring to your soulmate Paul Campbell ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 1584d

Ed Saper, when you present facts and statistics to cyclophobes they generaly fall on stony ground

David Burke ● 1584d

So defensive. Another sign of a feeble argument. I’m not a cyclophobe, by the way. But I don’t like London’s transport policy being formulated by a narrow interest group, which it is at the moment. You have to admit that’s true.The cycling numbers are still tiny. Most commuters want to use reliable, clean and cheap public transport. Making it harder for buses to navigate roads doesn’t improve that, does it?Poor Lycra men, foaming at the mouth about ‘cars, cars, cars’, when a lot of traffic generated is commercial vehicles. Or do you advocate those being removed from our roads as well? After all, most of those vans only have one person in them most of the time....

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

Thank you for the excuse to revisit one of my favourite self-owns from the militant car zealots in the past four years of cycle lane wars:http://www.chiswickw4.com/default.asp?section=info&page=conroad332.htmDavid Giles Suspended From Local Conservative Party."After making the post and his suspension he asked the administrator of the Brentford Today and TV page to put ‘Brentford Taliban’ in inverted commas.He made a follow post saying, “To put the record straight, the phrase ‘Brentford Taliban’ was first used by Russell Pearson who isn’t a member of the Conservative Party."Great stuff. It writes itself. Even better than "Rubbish bin Person" from the good ol' days of the forum.

Paul Campbell ● 1584d

EdGetting back to my point.  Wouldn’t a well designed,  camera controlled bus lane, the complete length of the high street reduce traffic as much as the cycle lane.  But would also increase the use of public transport?

Kieran Fox ● 1584d

That’s against current policy. They are actively removing bus lanes in favour of bike lanes. Brentford is next for this crazy idea.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

Having a cycle lane and buses in the mixed-use lanes with bus gates holding back other vehicles and buses stopping in the carriageway reduces road space for cars more than just having a bus lane and no cycle lane. It is absolutely the clearly-stated and transparent objective of transport authorities in many major cities, including London, to remove as many car journeys as possible, leaving more space for buses and other forms of PT and providing safe space for far more people to cycle than can do today.. I am sure it won't be long before cars are removed completely from the single lane on King Street. Cars using that as a through route instead of the A4 are absurd now.  And that is probably the way this will evolve over time along further sections too with special provision made for residents' access, disabled people and deliveries.  Does this sound extreme? From the FT article today on LTNs and behavioural change:"But what many people may not realise is that if the UK is to take its net-zero goals seriously, measures such as LTNs are just the start, says Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh, an environmental psychologist and director of the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST).A report by the International Energy Agency states that behavioural change will count for nearly two-thirds of the energy reduction needed to reach the net-zero goal. 'The sort of things that are going to be most effective to get to net zero will involve quite a significant degree of invasion in people's lifestyles,' says Prof Whitmarsh. 'unfortunately the public isn't really aware of how much things are going to change"

Paul Campbell ● 1584d

The Chiswick homunculus speaks.Chuck in the environment argument too. Except all vehicles will be electric by 2040, allegedly. So no nasty Nox to bleat about. People still have to get around. But as I said previously you want the roads just for yourself.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

"Wouldn’t a well designed,  camera controlled bus lane, the complete length of the high street reduce traffic as much as the cycle lane."My assumption is that priority bus routes would help to improve bus reliability and encourage more people to use public transport.It is worth pointing out that buses are less reliable and slower than they could be due to the volume of traffic - even increasing bus lanes won't remove pinch points because you can't put a bus lane everywhere.However, as the epic battles of the cycle lane have shown, reconfiguring the road to take space away from other vehicles is difficult.For instance, Fisher's Lane is a priority bus route, it improves bus reliability, has reduced traffic on previously congested roads, is unsuitable for two-way traffic, but there is still a campaign to allow cars through it again.The A4 had bus lanes and they were removed.  Not because they didn't work - they did, reducing rush hour journey times for both buses and cars - but because of a campaign by drivers.  Bus use is declining both by vehicle and passenger miles across the UK: bus passenger miles of circa 45bn was fairly constant from 1980 to 2010 and declined to 33bn or by 25% in 2019.In London, bikes overtook buses in vehicle miles in 2014 and by 2020 were over 150% higher (bikes: 589m miles vs buses 229m miles).  Both buses and bikes are efficient ways of transporting large numbers of people - both have a maximum capacity of around 10,000 passengers / cyclists per hour per lane - although the cycle lane would be two-way, you'd need an extra lane for two-way buses and a lot more buses to hit capacity, which could end up causing congestion when you run out of bus lane.  So there's a good argument for increasing provision of both bus lanes and cycle lanes - not at the expense of each, but replacing vehicle lanes.  And in places, you may find that bus routes (without lots of buses and cabs) will help encourage more cyclists anyway, like in Fishers Lane.

Ed Saper ● 1584d

Sorry Simon but electric vehicles still pollute, carry a high carbon footprint, kill and injure people and cause congestion costing the economy a great deal of money. You can insult people who do not share your passion for cars as much as you like but it isn't going to stop inevitable change.

Paul Campbell ● 1584d

"The cycling numbers are still tiny"For those using bikes and cars to get to work in London in 2020, those cycling were just over a quarter of those who drive.  In Inner London, cyclists outnumbered car drivers & passengers on the commute in late 2020 - about the same as National Rail and not far behind buses and walking.  Inner London isn't far - Hammersmith is in Inner London and it includes places like Kensington, Islington, Fulham and Greenwich.  "Most commuters want to use reliable, clean and cheap public transport."I agree - and when it comes to buses, it is the volume of traffic that is "making it harder for buses to navigate roads".Cutting the traffic back to 2010 levels is a big challenge which will take several years and involve some big decisions on road allocation, pricing, access to minor roads (which is where 100% of the traffic growth has been), home deliveries and ride hailing services.  But high capacity transport, whether that's rail, bus, walking or cycling, will all play their part in the mix. 

Ed Saper ● 1584d

You really are a twit. Change, climate, pollution, etcYou don’t know my passions, but like all sanctimonious twerps you think you do. Your passion is obvious. Doesn’t make you right. The problem is much bigger than you.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

Sorry. 2029 figures don’t count. Try again.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

Homunculus.Bet you still fly off to foreign parts, often for a bit of cycling up, say, Mont Ventoux. Of course, aviation doesn’t count.You sounds like the other handful of zealots on these forums. Passive aggressive and really simplistic in your viewpoint. Utopia doesn’t exist. If it did we would all live there now.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

We’ll see what happens over the next seven years.

Ed Saper ● 1584d

You're reduced to insults , you're out of you're depth.

David Burke ● 1584d

Yes David. Simon's corner has thrown in the towel. It's all on Kieran now. Let's see what he's got.

Paul Campbell ● 1584d

And yet Paul continues to drive himself.

David Lesniak ● 1584d

Surely the whole point is not ALWAYS driving yourself everywhere.  It is about using better alternatives where you can and not simply presuming that there are never any better alternatives and that you can't try something different or new.

Philippa Bond ● 1584d

But that’s what most people do. Why do you make these definitive pronouncements all the time? Unless you are omnipotent you can’t possibly know what everyone chooses as a travel option.It’s the few cycling zealots who make sweeping generalisations about their fellow residents. People like Paul Campbell probably do more to put others off cycling than encourage them.And, frankly, none of their arguments add up. If electric cars are bad for the environment, then surely buses, vans, lorries and every other vehicle is just as polluting, even if fully electric? Even bikes pollute.One suspects that these weirdos would be happy to take us back to the 17th century.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

What makes you think motorists don’t do that Philippa? . You think Paul Campbell is somehow unique.

Maggie Dodge ● 1584d

She makes so many of her points personal, using snide and what she thinks are smart alex comments to put down her perceived adversaries. She is all over this forum but adds little of value to it. She should be called out for what she is, one of this sites resident trolls. Read a post from her and you just know it will be full of invective. Que her response to this....

Gareth Sinclair ● 1584d

It's not about taking us back in time.  It is about adapting to a changing future.  It can be more of a challenge thinking about it than doing it.  We have to be more flexible and that includes finding more and better ways to do this as the situation changes.We can't all just wave a card and buy our way out of all problems either - however much some people hope and think they can.  Just swapping a personal petrol or diesel car to an electric and driving just as big or bigger won't reduce the congestion.

Philippa Bond ● 1584d

Paul Campbell is enthusiastic about a move to active travel instead of always using a car.  I believe he cycles not just himself but also his children and shopping where and when he can. I don't think that means that he HAS to ALWAYS cycle absolutely everywhere however far away or whatever other constraints there are as some on here would unrealistically expect.

Philippa Bond ● 1584d

So, same amount of vehicles on narrowed road space, not to mention the majority of cyclists who don't use the lanes that taxpayers have wasted millions on and those who poodle along in the middle of the road blocking the traffic have no effect whatsoever? Not to mention the (empty) roads closed to vehicles.I worked in transport research for 10 years when the cycling lobby were promoting the idea that forcing traffic into a narrow space would result in everyone jumping onto bicycles. It was obviously nonsense then and has now been proven to be true at massive expensive and disruption.It's time that the cycling lobby admitted that this has been a huge (and predictable) failure and paid a levy to make up for the unnecessary expense.

Charlotte Kasner ● 1584d

Philippa, are you enjoying Paul's Kool-Aid?We all do the same thing. Thinking twice before heading out the door. Ordering online as you often advocate. And yet you paint with Paul's overly wet, wide brush casting aspersions where none are relevant nor necessary. If Paul we to be taken at his word, we'd be hearing about how he ditched his car and only belongs to a car club. Instead, we hear about his Jaguar which my guess is fully kitted out. So a slight inconsistency with his rhetoric.

David Lesniak ● 1584d

Maybe he has the luxury of a lifestyle and income that allows him to do that. Very many people don’t.But pollution comes in many forms. Do you think knocking down buildings and putting up tower blocks is emission free? A lot of particulate emissions come from construction, as well as the damage done to roads and pavements by the lorries delivering or removing material. Sadiq Khan was supposed to introduce a licensing system to make on site plant emission free, but surprise, surprise it hasn’t been enforced.TfL has been very dilatory in changing its bus fleet to zero emission. Another 15 years until that’s done. A slow moving, diesel powered bus, stopping frequently is a major source of pollution, yet no urgency to upgrade the fleet.All so easy to simply say too many cars, when the problem is really too many people needing to get about or needing services. Cycling is fine for some (and the supposed figures supporting the ‘boom’ are suspect to say the least). Things will get worse as more people are crammed into parts of London, since very little supporting infrastructure is going in alongside.But I bet Paul Campbell happily flies off on holidays. Probably not so virtuous as he claims.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

Careful Charlotte, you’ll have the Lycra brigade choking on their Sunday morning cappuccinos and croissants.The idea that London should become a cycling city is laughable. The size of the place makes it a nonsense. It’s not Oslo or Copenhagen. The demographics don’t work. The employment for many doesn’t work. The cost of bike ownership is too much for a lot of people.The cycling lobby is a tiny minority in powerful positions. Gilligan and Julian Bell on the TfL board. Certain media people. They constantly push a negative message about everything other than cycling. There’s no questioning the orthodoxy, even if the truth proves different. Facts are conveniently ignored, every time.Sadiq Khan isn’t a cyclist. He gets ferried about in a diesel powered 4x4. His grand idea is Vision Zero, to eradicate deaths and serious injuries on London’s roads by 2041. That’s only achievable by banning all wheeled vehicles, including bikes and escooters, but that will never happen. A pipe dream but one pursued at enormous cost to Londoners.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

No Charlotte.  It is not as simple as that.  As a walker on pavements I'm surprised you haven't mentioned the number of those that have been and are continually being damaged by cars vans and lorries being driven over them or the number of residents or businesses you pass by who have or have had building work done to their homes and premises but do not hold their builders or themselves responsible for the damage to the pavements so often caused.  Damage which can be deadly or life changing to pedestrians causing extra work which our under funded and over-stretched NHS does not need and which we all (or those of us who pay our taxes) fund.  That damage also pushes would-be pedestrians into cars and some onto bicycles (there are all sorts of these - see Wheels for Wellbeing) or public transport. There are a number of very vociferous intransigent people who think that the clock can and should stop especially for them. Luckily many others don't feel the same.  Ten years ago is a long time - the seriousness of climate change and the damage caused by fossil fuels was not as apparent.

Philippa Bond ● 1584d

"All so easy to simply say too many cars, when the problem is really too many people needing to get about or needing services.....Things will get worse as more people are crammed into parts of London." There's an implicit assumption that population growth or increasing economic activity results in more traffic. That was not the case in London between 1999 and 2009 when population and GDP increased, but traffic decreased. The ambition is to grow the economy faster, take in more people and actually reduce traffic, just as we managed to do for 10 years. Public transport, particularly buses, does have a "too many cars" and other vehicles problem.   One solution is to provide more bus lanes and reduce lanes for traffic — that will both increase bus speed and reliability while reducing road space for vehicles which should reduce demand. Increasing capacity for safe cycling will increase demand for cycling and act as a safety valve for economic growth, allowing more people to move about quickly without bringing the city to gridlock.   You complain that "very little supporting infrastructure is going in", but that's exactly what is happening — a modest increase in cycling infrastructure and a huge new tube line over the next couple of months. There is plenty more that councils and city government can do to reduce traffic congestion — whether that's restricting traffic on residential roads, regulating Uber, introducing congestion charges / road pricing, providing incentives for home deliveries to move away from vans, setting up drop off points and lockers to help deliveries move to off peak times, providing infrastructure for shipment consolidation or taxing same / next day van deliveries and more.   However, if we want to enjoy roads that aren't choked with traffic and air that doesn't choke us, we are all going to have to accept some changes to how we live our lives.

Ed Saper ● 1584d

I don't advocate a lot of deliveries.  I get one about every three months.  They are there for when something is unmanageable.  I don't advocate buying on a whim and a fancy.  It can cost more than the price.  I don't use Amazon on principle.  I think that the old fashioned delivery system of the fishmonger delivering to one village on a set day a week and the butcher another set day would be far better. It depends on how many people will be at home or if other arrangements can be made.

Philippa Bond ● 1584d

That’s not true Phillipa. Climate change was widely discussed 30 years ago. It formed a topic in my degree. Fossil fuels were acknowledged as a problem, but that was known about for even longer, hence the Clean Air Acts of the 1950s. London’s air is cleaner now than it has ever been in the past 150 years.Local authorities have abandoned their duties as far as pavement maintenance is concerned. The money for that comes from the same ring fenced pot as bike lanes, but is rarely used for that.You call people intransigent, yet the solutions you offer create as many problems as they supposedly solve, and become problems themselves.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

The reason traffic increased was the boom in hone deliveries and taxi services like Uber. Car ownership dropped and continues to drop in London.Cycle lanes are not the infrastructure I’m talking about, though it seems to be all you can comprehend. Schools, shops, leisure facilities, GP surgeries, hospitals, etc, etc. Parts of the capital are barely coping now. Some boroughs are worse than others. Brentford residents have very little in the way of services on their doorstep despite all the building going on there. If things aren’t close then you have no option but to travel.And your assumption that more people will cycle if more lanes are built is flawed. It’s a leisure activity for many, not a transport mode for everyday life. Oh, and the Elizabeth line won’t solve a lot of problems in most of the capital.

Simon Hayes ● 1584d

Let’s ban owning homes abroad. How many flights does that generate. That willaffect the better off and perhaps give some respite to the average person who needs to drive. Or even the better off without holiday homes  but who are frequent flyers? How many live in the LTNs I wonder . Every flight should be scrutinised and have to be passed by a panel. Let’s set some hoops for frequent flyers to jump through. I don’t mean charge them, I mean don’t allow them. That’s when you know you’re interested in climate change and not revenue

Maggie Dodge ● 1583d

Nimby Chiswickians favourite subject never seems to go away.Just think of it as good for your health, maybe sociable, possibly community building.But then again you probably wont.

John Flynn ● 1583d

"the Elizabeth line won’t solve a lot of problems in most of the capital."No, but it will help support economic growth by increasing rail capacity by 10% and directly linking Heathrow, the West End, the City and Canary Wharf without increasing road traffic.  "The reason traffic increased was the boom in hone deliveries and taxi services like Uber."Yes, and Google Maps which dramatically increased road capacity, which helps to explain why all the traffic growth over the last 10 years has been on minor roads.  I outlined several measures that could be taken to reduce the number of home deliveries, move them to off peak or out of vans.  It isn't impossible to tackle Uber either, and one way to fix the Google Maps problem is to restrict local roads to access only."And your assumption that more people will cycle if more lanes are built is flawed. It’s a leisure activity for many, not a transport mode for everyday life. "Increasing cycle lanes directly leads to more people cycling.  Just like building a new motorway leads to more people driving.  Or building a new tube line leads to more people taking the tube.  Some of that will be for work, some for leisure, some for shopping - sure.  In terms of cycling being a transport mode:Commuting in Inner London (e.g. Hammersmith, Islington, West End etc.) per day: 2019 - Cars 14% (0.274m), Bikes 7% (0.145m)Bikes transported roughly half the number of commuters as cars in Inner London in 2019 - and in Q4 2020, bikes transported 12% more, and the ambition should be to maintain and grow that.  Given the amount of space 274,000 cars take up (about 630 acres excluding parking, just a bit smaller than The City of London), reducing that by half would give more space to buses and commercial vehicles throughout London.

Ed Saper ● 1583d

Shouldn’t you be out cycling in this lovely weather. Lots of bike lanes to enjoy.We know those cycling figures were massaged by the same cyclists repeatedly passing the counting points.

Simon Hayes ● 1583d

Many people have family who live abroad.  Are you suggesting they can't visit family?  Many people work abroad.  We now have IT and can have meetings on Zoom and Microsoft Teams so don't have to fly so often for those.  Remember the Icelandic volcano?  That increased the use of IT for those.  A frequent flyer tax has been mooted before but I suppose there are a lot of MPs who have homes and families abroad...A progressive income tax that goes right to the top instead of stopping would be a good idea.

Philippa Bond ● 1583d

Sociable is sitting having a coffee or possibly going for a walk together. Cycling is not the best time for a chat. It’s also tearing communities apart! What you want is for us to go away, we feel the same. An under used cycle lane is a mistake that should be undone .

Maggie Dodge ● 1583d

It's not finished is it?

Philippa Bond ● 1583d

Simon. It's not true that bike lane money comes from the same pot as pavement mending.  Grants come from central Govt specifically for projects.  Years ago I remember reading the list of grants that could be applied for from Eric Pickles' grant pot.  If you were lucky you might win something.  Years of austerity and cost cutting together with grab-a-grant projects which if not completed by a certain date that money had to be returned.  It was often not enough money to complete something so iy was completed badly in a hurry.

Philippa Bond ● 1583d

Simon. It's not true that bike lane money comes from the same pot as pavement mending.  Grants come from central Govt specifically for projects.  Years ago I remember reading the list of grants that could be applied for from Eric Pickles' grant pot.  If you were lucky you might win something.  Years of austerity and cost cutting together with grab-a-grant projects which if not completed by a certain date that money had to be returned.  It was often not enough money to complete something so iy was completed badly in a hurry.

Philippa Bond ● 1583d

I feel compelled to mention Ed's evidence is now 13 years past its due date. One would think he'd notice that.As Simon has rightly pointed out, it completely omits the impact of Uber, Amazon and other deliveries which have been on a constant upward trajectory. It also completely ignores the impact of bike hire, e-bikes and e-scooters all being crammed on to the road networks. These are new factors introduced to the traffic calculus since 2009. I also feel compelled to mention Ed still air freights his product. I'm sure he'll blather on about carbon offsets, but those are little more than corporate management techniques to assuage paying customers guilt.

David Lesniak ● 1583d

Philippa, are you concerned about the damage being done to pavements because poor cycle way design has removed loading bays and forced deliveries onto the pavements when that didn't used to be the case?Are you concerned about the damage being done to pavements by the Sunday markets which now allow vehicles to drive along the pavement to load and unload? Pavement which was specified to accommodate the live load of people, not the dead load of delivery vehicles.Your righteous indignation isn't aimed as broadly as it should be.

David Lesniak ● 1583d

Well Paul, now obviously I must respond 😊.I like the idea of the cycle lane.  When my children are older, I hope they will be safer when using it to cycle.  Now their main form of travel is walking and public transport, with the odd car journey thrown in for journeys where public transport is not practical.  Bikes and scooters are used as well, but more for fun.  Busses and the tube are more important than bikes when we travel.I question the efficiency of having the cycle lane and the overall benefits to travel in London it delivers.The following TFL Travel in London Report delivers some interesting figures and summaries on cycling https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-12.pdfIt suggests to me that cycle lanes actually benefit a small section of the population.Active travel: Cycling in London Summary (Page 109)According to the LTDS, in 2018/19 just below 21 per cent of Londoners reported having cycled at least once in the last year, which is the lowest proportion since 2010/11. This strongly suggests that the growth in cycling observed in volumetric counts is driven by population growth, and by people who already cycle making more trips.Most people who cycle in London do so quite regularly and have been doing so for more than five years. They also tend to be mostly male, white, in employment, and with relatively higher household incomes.The cycle intercept surveys on cycle routes that were opened in 2018 show good overall user satisfaction with the improvements and a positive correlation between the provision of cycling infrastructure and the perception of safety, which may be stronger where the infrastructure is segregated. They also show that the demographic profile of users of these new cycle routes is not markedly different to that of the general cycling population in London.Most users of cycle routes where TfL has invested in cycling are people who also live in London, cycle very regularly, and who have been cycling on that route for a relatively long time. However, almost 75 per cent of users consider the cycling facilities along the route a significant factor in their choice of mode and route for that journey.

Kieran Fox ● 1583d

No its not finished in fact a lot of it is closed at present so its little surprise then that its 'underused'.Cycling is very sociable, contrary to the thinking of some people on this forum who don't appear cycle at all.

Matthew Swain ● 1582d

"Cycling is very sociable, contrary to the thinking of some people on this forum who don't appear cycle at all."Perhaps some people on this Forum are Disabled with mobility issues or cycling,  for whatever reason, isn't compatible with their lifestyle ?The part of tC9 from Chiswick Lane to Heathfield Terrace is fully open, yet so many cyclists of all ages prefer to use the pavement or CHR both east and westbound, any idea why that is Matthew ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 1582d

I absolutely loved getting out on my bike until early onset arthritis stopped it. What I learned to do was cycle as if every other road user was an idiot, something that I still practice as a car driver. I never, ever, cycled on the pavement nor without lights at night.

N V Brooks ● 1582d

Just in case  Paul and Ed missed my earlier response.I like the idea of the cycle lane.  When my children are older, I hope they will be safer when using it to cycle.  Now their main form of travel is walking and public transport, with the odd car journey thrown in for journeys where public transport is not practical.  Bikes and scooters are used as well, but more for fun.  Busses and the tube are more important than bikes when we travel.I question the efficiency of having the cycle lane and the overall benefits to travel in London it delivers.The following TFL Travel in London Report delivers some interesting figures and summaries on cycling https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-12.pdfIt suggests to me that cycle lanes actually benefit a small section of the population.Active travel: Cycling in London Summary (Page 109)According to the LTDS, in 2018/19 just below 21 per cent of Londoners reported having cycled at least once in the last year, which is the lowest proportion since 2010/11. This strongly suggests that the growth in cycling observed in volumetric counts is driven by population growth, and by people who already cycle making more trips.Most people who cycle in London do so quite regularly and have been doing so for more than five years. They also tend to be mostly male, white, in employment, and with relatively higher household incomes.The cycle intercept surveys on cycle routes that were opened in 2018 show good overall user satisfaction with the improvements and a positive correlation between the provision of cycling infrastructure and the perception of safety, which may be stronger where the infrastructure is segregated. They also show that the demographic profile of users of these new cycle routes is not markedly different to that of the general cycling population in London.Most users of cycle routes where TfL has invested in cycling are people who also live in London, cycle very regularly, and who have been cycling on that route for a relatively long time. However, almost 75 per cent of users consider the cycling facilities along the route a significant factor in their choice of mode and route for that journey.

Kieran Fox ● 1582d

UK has lower NO2 levels regardless of cycle utopia in the Netherlands. Funny that. Cleaner cars have made more difference here than a network of cycle lanes causing congestion have there

Maggie Dodge ● 1582d

You could make a similar argument that car owners in London "also tend to be mostly male, white, in employment, and with relatively higher household incomes."Around half of households have access to a car - the richer you are, the more likely you are to have one.  Around 21% of Londoners reported cycling in the last year in 2019, as you quoted, and that grew to 27% in 2020/21 and "Londoners from Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities were not significantly less likely to have cycled over the past 12 months than white Londoners."https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2021/october/the-people-cycling-in-london-are-more-diverse-than-everBut if I were to paraphrase your point: cyclists are a tiny, white minority who are given disproportionate attention and money, and even if we want more people to cycle, people just won't because it is so elitist, they all wear lycra and it's unfair on everyone else.However, when you look at the numbers, the number of people cycling isn't a tiny minority.In Outer London 14% of people cycle once a month, 10% once a week (2018/2019). In Inner London it is 23% once a month and 18% once a week.  Hounslow is 16% monthly and 11% weekly, but Hammersmith (Inner London) is 31% monthly and 18% weekly, while Richmond (Outer London) is 36% monthly and 27% weekly.  https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/walking-and-cycling-statistics-england-2020You can pull out statistics from the link above and if you like you can "prove" that cycling is a tiny minority by limiting it to Outer London and those who cycle 5 times a week and only for travel and not leisure and you can get to less than 2% and therefore we should reopen Fishers Lane and remove C9 because cycling will never, ever be a legitimate activity of the majority and the cars need all the space.Or you can take the view that cycling is a legitimate transport option because it is high capacity, zero carbon / pollution and healthy and is the sort of think we should do more of, while we do less of the stuff which is inefficient, high carbon / pollution and is making us unhealthy - oh, and it works pretty well in other countries.  And if you take that view, then tackling the reasons people don't cycle more - mainly because it is/feels so bloody dangerous to cycle on the roads with tipper trucks, let alone doing it with kids on the school run - then a cycle lane doesn't seem like such a bad idea. 

Ed Saper ● 1582d

Tipper trucks. Maybe they should ban them.The diversity of car users is far more mixed than cyclists. And you do insist on putting those lockdown stats in. Cycling dropped right off again after the lockdowns ended and those leisure trips stopped.Admit it, Ed, you just want the roads to yourself.

Simon Hayes ● 1582d

I want roads to be less congested, less dirty and safe for all users. Anyone whose stated aim is to rip out a cycle lane because it takes space away from their car, really hasn’t got the right to accuse anyone else of being selfish.

Ed Saper ● 1582d

EdThat summary comes from a TFL report on the use of cycle lanes, it was based on use up to the start of the pandemic.  I'm not saying that cycling is a tiny minority.  I looked at the report and it suggests that the cycle lanes tend to be used by people who have been cycling for some time and that the biggest users are white middle class men.  Did TFL make this up?  I didn't change any of the summary.  It also says cycling journeys have increased,  but again it suggests this is that the same people are making more journeys,  not lots more new people taking up cycling.  This isn't some anti cycling website, it's TFLs own report.  Tell me if I have misunderstood the summary.

Kieran Fox ● 1582d

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear in my previous post.  The following is the summary from the TFL report on active travel.  Not my commentary on it.Active travel: Cycling in London Summary (Page 109)  https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-12.pdf"According to the LTDS, in 2018/19 just below 21 per cent of Londoners reported having cycled at least once in the last year, which is the lowest proportion since 2010/11. This strongly suggests that the growth in cycling observed in volumetric counts is driven by population growth, and by people who already cycle making more trips.Most people who cycle in London do so quite regularly and have been doing so for more than five years. They also tend to be mostly male, white, in employment, and with relatively higher household incomes.The cycle intercept surveys on cycle routes that were opened in 2018 show good overall user satisfaction with the improvements and a positive correlation between the provision of cycling infrastructure and the perception of safety, which may be stronger where the infrastructure is segregated. They also show that the demographic profile of users of these new cycle routes is not markedly different to that of the general cycling population in London.Most users of cycle routes where TfL has invested in cycling are people who also live in London, cycle very regularly, and who have been cycling on that route for a relatively long time. However, almost 75 per cent of users consider the cycling facilities along the route a significant factor in their choice of mode and route for that journey."

Kieran Fox ● 1582d

Cyclist numbers are well above prepandemic levels both locally and nationally. GB cycling counts are up by 44%, while car counts are 1% down for the first week of May compared to early March 2020 according to DfT data. The 2021 cycle counts on the High Road were up 39% on prepandemic levels compared to 33% higher in 2020 according to the TfL annual data series that goes back to 2015. It’s difficult to miss there’s been a significant increase in cyclists.https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/transport-use-during-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemichttps://cycling.data.tfl.gov.uk/

Tom Pike ● 1582d

A white middle-class middle-aged male driver, a bus user and a cyclist walk into a cafe. They are given a plate with three biscuits on it. The driver takes two of them and says to the bus user, "Watch out! That white middle-class middle-aged male tax-dodging, uninsured, unlicensed Lycra lout doesn't care about vulnerable road-users and he is trying to steal your biscuit."

Paul Campbell ● 1582d

Doesn't really address the report Paul but was funny.

Kieran Fox ● 1581d

Early March 2020 people had already started self imposed form of lockdown so your "figures" aren't surprising.

Mark Talbot ● 1581d

The notes on the DfT data show that the car counts are compared to the first week of February that year. They actually show very little difference for the first two weeks in March, being at 101% and 99% of the February levels. The cycle counts are baselined to the first week of March when, as the car counts demonstrate, there was not yet any appreciable effect from the pandemic.

Tom Pike ● 1581d

A lot better than another round of playing chess with pigeons for sure. And a much better use of all of our time too.

Paul Campbell ● 1581d

Not particularly funny, but reinforces your prejudices.

Simon Hayes ● 1581d

You were pretty clear in your post - you quoted the TFL report to say that 21% of Londoners had ridden a bike in the last year (2018/19) and that most cyclists had been cycling for a long time.From that you deduced "cycle lanes actually benefit a small section of the population" and stated: "I question the efficiency of having the cycle lane and the overall benefits to travel in London it delivers."I don't think you should misinterpret my response as not understanding your point simply because I did not agree with it.  I do agree that it is still a relatively small proportion of all Londoners who cycle regularly - although the numbers cycling regularly vary widely from area to area - e.g. Hammersmith: 31% cycle at least monthly and 18% at least weekly.Whereas you use a London wide average to justify removing cycling infrastructure in Chiswick where C9 has already proved successful, I say it justifies more cycling infrastructure here to connect up the schools and in many other areas.The sort of cyclist who historically commutes into London daily on main roads, aggressively defending themselves against traffic and still regularly getting killed and injured in the process is a minority.  It certainly doesn't describe me, my wife, my kids or the families on Chiswick Tractors who use C9 on the school run.Nor does it describe the majority of people in London who long ago voted with their feet and stopped cycling because it feels / is so bloody dangerous on a road network that had safe cycling designed or suffocated out of it.  Removing the cycle lane would take away highly efficient transport infrastructure - one that doesn't generate CO2, air pollution or traffic congestion.  It would also make the roads more dangerous for a lot of people and thus significantly reduce growth in cycling, which is exactly why some people want it removed.

Ed Saper ● 1581d

EdI think a bus lanes would more benefit to more people than a cycle lanes.  I said that originally.  I don’t think the cycle lane will be removed or should it,  it would be a massive waist of money.  The report suggests that the cycle lanes in London  are not encouraging new cyclists,  it (not me) suggests the same people are just cycling more often.  Are you suggesting TFL have got it wrong?

Kieran Fox ● 1581d

Improving bus services would certainly benefit more people but it doesn’t suit the prevailing ‘wisdom’ at TfL, whose board is crammed full of cycling zealots like Julian Bell and Andrew Gilligan. They see it as their duty to re-educate the masses about the joys of cycling, even though clearly the vast majority of Londoners won’t ever use it as their preferred mode of transport.Sadiq Khan has cut bus services, starting well before the pandemic. Ironic considering he always boasts about being the son of a bus driver.Ask most people who commute any distance in London what they would like to see and you’d be told fast, efficient public transport that’s pleasant to use. It’s always been thus.And one of the things that puts regular cyclists off is, surprise, other cyclists getting in their way.

Simon Hayes ● 1581d

Maybe it does, but it does make me wonder how many ‘let’s get rid of the cycle Lane’  (or similar) supporters who cite the disruption to buses (and I do believe that bus journeys going through Chiswick have been adversely affected by the current changes in road space allocation) actually use the buses that are affected. And out of those who don’t use the buses affected by the changes in road space allocation, how many genuinely care about the affected passengers?

Andrew Jones ● 1581d

I use buses along that route fairly often. Making them slower is part of the overall policy of bringing road traffic in London to a grinding halt. The bright sparks, led by Sadiq Khan, think by making driving in London nigh on impossible they will cause everyone to hop onto a bike to get around.Only the LCC think this is a great thing. In a mature society they should be looking at how to improve traffic flows. Congestion isn’t caused by ‘too many cars’, it’s caused by poor road design, poor junction layouts and meddling with traffic signals. The more pinch points you in place, the worse it makes it.There is a place for cycling, but it’s not the great panacea advocated by those on this forum.

Simon Hayes ● 1581d

“In a mature society they should be looking at how to improve traffic flows.”I agree, but that does not mean completing the London ring roads that were abandoned decades ago.In fact Embankment with its cycle lane is now carrying a higher proportion of traffic through the City than before, so while the principle of improving flow is correct, it should include all travel modes and put emphasis on those that reduce pollution and emissions.

Tom Pike ● 1581d

Yawn. If only everything and everyone could do all their jobs by bike. Wouldn’t it be fabulous?But in the real world, all the meddling with roads is increasing congestion for businesses and tradespeople.Not everyone sits at a desk in the spare room sipping coffee all day before heading out for a refreshing bike ride.The point is, the LCC has infiltrated enough positions of influence to dictate the agenda, without any consideration of the consequences for the majority of Londoners who aren’t obsessed with all things cycling....

Simon Hayes ● 1580d

Traffic chaos in W4 in the evenings at the moment. Not sure what the specific cause is, but queues on Acton Lane back past the petrol station, High Road solid all the way to Chiswick roundabout, Sutton Court Road solid down to A4 and backed up all around Turnham Green, barely moving. This is all the commuter traffic looking to exit London. Was like the yesterday and again today. Won't go onto bikes but much of it should be on public transport.

Bill George ● 1580d