TfL boss paints cycle superhighway debate as "cyclists" v "businesses" despite 170 firms in favour

The sheer number of 1-person cars (drivers only) coming into the city is an indictment of how bad public transport provision is, how dangerous people feel the roads are to cycle on and how inconvenient walking as a form of commuting is (given the cost of housing and living a good distance from work).

Making cycling a viable means of transport will free up space on both the roads and public transport while creating a healthier society.

New York City has done it...Hendy with his sh*t accent should take note.

But why let the obvious get in the way...

Hendy implies that "businesses" have opposed the schemes, but as far as I can tell only one significant business has come out and said so - and then only because it has been "outed" in its attempts to influence the position behind the scenes with unattributed "briefings".

Business associations certainly have expressed opposition. The Licensed Taxi Drivers Association - well, there's a surprise - are against, and the Chambers of Commerce and London First both, at least initially, published negative responses. I think the Road Haulage Association is in there somewhere too.

Many businesses which rely on loading and unloading seemed rather less concerned about the implications for loading etc than the loaders/unloaders themselves. Apparently they don't see it as being that much harder to wheel a trolley across a cycle path and a footway than across a footway alone.

One LTDA objection to the embankment section is that the separating median is not wide enough to unload a wheelchair-bound passenger on to. If that were true, I would entirely agree that it needs to be sorted, but it isn't - the designs show that the medians will actually be plenty wide enough.

The principal City of London objection was that it was bad news for pedestrians in a couple of places - never mind that it is a huge improvement in many, many others. And I would have more sympathy with their view if they had shown any backbone in dealing with TfL over pedestrian crossings around their patch in the past, or the removal of zebras, or even entire crossings, which they have simply stood aside and watched without protest.

So TfL boss is against something that would mean people aren't paying to use the tube or buses? Funny that...

So what if some motor traffic has more delays?

With the volume of commuters in London there is always going to be less space than traffic so cyclists and pedestrians should be prioritised over cars. The rationale for this is overwhelming - walking and cycling has health, environmental and economic benefits, while cars produce only costs.

More delays for motor traffic should encourage those drivers on to bikes wherever possible - an exponential cycle, which will increase the quality of life in the city.

It’s our job to try to sort something that works for everybody.

Using modelling software that doesn't actually reflect reality. More roads doesn't cure congestion, it leads to more cars.

Hendy is out of touch, he should quit.

"“Our job is to balance a scarce resource against a whole variety of claims... and it’s difficult.”

A fine line... if they had ever shown any interest in balancing space requirements in the last few decades, rather than creating gyratories, multi-lane roads, monstrous overpasses and generally making much of London impassable by bike and slow and noisy and polluted by foot.

If there's balancing to be done, it's to correct every other highways decision of the last 40 years. Which means going all-out for the things that will restore some balance.

This cuts to the heart of the issue whether we want a London built for machines or for people.

And we're going to have to live with that choice for decades.

I read that the Embankment cycle route will offer the same capacity as 20 Tube trains. At £1.5m per coach that's over £200m for the trains alone, though of course the signalling and station upgrades required to allow that many more to run are actually impossible, and a fraction of that increase would cost billions to the taxpayer.
So the cycle route is good value. Canary Wharf contributed £150m to the costs of Crossrail. They should be thankful they're not being asked to contribute to this improvement to the transport links to their demesne.

This really needs to go ahead in London and be a success for cycling infrastructure to be improved seriously in the rest of the country...

No, its Canary Wharf Group verses everyone else in London.

Hendy needs to get onboard or get out.