Anti-cycling campaigner claims bike lanes cause pollution

Cars are the principle producer of air pollution, and that pollution is not necessarily localised to the road it is produced on.  Cars dont run that efficiently in cities at the best of time (urban cycle is always a lower mpg), but increasing the number of stop/starts probably will further decrease their efficiency and increase the amount of pollution.  If you end up with the same number of cars in fewer lanes it may increase the amount of pollution due to increased congestion on narrower roads (which is presumably Ms Learmond-Criqui argument).  On the other hand if the number of car journeys decreases (as is likely to happen if cycling and walking feels more comfortable), then there is a triple win, few cars=less pollution AND less congestion AND nicer cycling and walking.  ...but a lot depends on what assumptions you make about the nature of tarnsport and people. 

This silly mare is now campaigning against a Sainsburys being built in Belsize Park for fear that it will make the area "too posh"...

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/protesters-aiming-to-block-sainsbu...

"However, Cllr Lazzaro Pietragnoli questioned Ms Learmond-Criqui's approach to the problem". Blimey that's a pretty cosmopolitan neighbourhood they have there in Hampstead.

I think  Cllr Lazzaro Pietragnoli is on the nose. Yes there is a problem with the traffic volumes and by reducing the capacity you then increase delays and therefore make the problem worse, but building more lane capacity doesn't help in the long run.

To paraphrase Field of Dreams "Build it and they will come", if you build more capacity into a road system then the volume of traffic will rise to use up that capacity. So you end up with the same problem that you had previously, only with even more cars to deal with. In order to deal with our congested streets we need to cause a modal shift so that all these short journeys (over half of all car journeys are under 5 miles) are done by other means to relieve congestion which benefits car drivers, and relieve air pollution which beneftis everyone.

I'm surprised she hasn't mentioned how bike lanes are empty and shown that to be a cause of under use, rather than the reality of the situation that you don't see standstill bikes as the lanes aren't congested

It's almost as if traffic isn't already at a standstill in this area without any bike lanes in place - how exactly does she think it's going to get worse?

I am sure the esteemed lawyer has plenty of time to draft her facebook messages while in her stationary Bentley in traffic jams on Fitzjohns Ave (Hampstead NW3). I lived there 20 years ago and the traffic around that area was grim even then! Must be horrendous now....

Having engaged with her several times, and spoken and two of the three meetings held on CS11 in St John's Wood, Hamstead & Maida Vale, I decided to dig around the statistics. 

DfT have the figures using Finchley Road at just over 13million annually, that is the stretch from Adelaide Road to the A598. That is down 10,000 cars a day from 2012, and about 20,000 from 2000. 

The claims that the traffic is driven by the M1 doesn't hold water either, with most traffic using junction 2 of the M1 (not 1) and dissipating along the A406. 

I put it all in a blog here, and would welcome comments should anyone have them. https://mettresurlaplaque.wordpress.com/2016/04/23/local-roads-for-local...

so if they were all bike lanes the pollution would be even worse eh?

Sadiq Khan should ensure that QW plans get the same level of priority afforded to upgraded pipe lines carrying eter or sewage.  

...err that's water or sewage - apologies (and for the other typos).

I ws going to add also that ensuring that TfL are Human Streets (mayor's legacy document)-savvy, and are given the necessary powers to get these, and CS routes in, would be teh best way to achieving this.

Howling and baying motorists have caused enough damage and delay.

The new mayor needs to be in possession of the facts and not get distracted and waylaid by the noise of those who have been obscenely over-indulged for too long.   

This woman thrives on the publicity.

At an open meeting for TfL to explain exactly what the scheme would entail - the reducing of rat-running in Regents Park and the providing of an improved cycled route from Swiss Cottage and the removal of one of London's prime death gyratories - she enlisted a mob of her cronies to shout down the TfL speakers, particularly  a young woman who seemed to draw out the demented hostility of the baying NW3 mob.

A breathtaking and staggering demonstration of the loss of all reason and critical faculties, and orchestrated by L. Criqui, who at one point aske for her supporters to allow the TfL speaker to have their say, and "at the end you can really pile in".

They complain about increased rat-running on side-streets (a reason for keeping the current, unsustainable, carcinogenic and menacing situation). The complete logic, of course is taht you take the necessary steps beforehand to ensure rat-running is not possible.

Andrew Gilligan: 'opponents have said, “among, other things, that we’re going to take the cycle lane down Finchley Road, take out traffic lanes - that’s not true, and I worry that people are being led to oppose this scheme under false pretenses" '.

Though he had to repeat this at the afforementione meeting maybe five or six times, falling on deaf ears each time, the fact nevertheless remains that Finchley Road WAS once in line for a CS route - and furthermore these plans should be eviewed under the next mayoralty.

Sadiq Khan should ensure that QW plans get the same level of priority afforded to upgraded pipe lines carrying eter or sewage. 

These schemes are essentail for public health - they are not merely to allow those that currnetly cycle to get along a bit quicher, more easily and safely. 

Public health will be impacted beyond all measure once the negative effects of catastrophic climate breakdown start to kick in. 

have british politics  lost the litle mind they have left in their brains? We all know that creature is that. A zombie!!

What evidence does she need? she's a specialist employment lawyer and therefore feels that she is fully qualified to make informed statements about road planning and traffic management issues.

Or maybe she should keep her mouth closed about stuff she doesn't really understand and reduce her own hot air emmissions. I suspect that her real motive is that she drives a rather expensive and larger than necessary car a few miles every day and doesn't like the idea that she might be inconvenienced or horror of horrors feel obliged to walk, cycle or use public transport herself.

And her evidence to support this?