- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Girl holding hands with dad on Cycle Superhighway (source BikesandBabies on Twitter).PNGBusiness group suggests "dramatic rethink" of bike lanes
The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) has suggested London’s Cycle Superhighways, which carry thousands of people to work by bike in peak hours, be made part time at the busiest times, and the Congestion Charge reversed, in a bid to cut traffic jams.
Approximately 7,000 cyclists use the Victoria Embankment on CS3 and approximately 8,000 cyclists use Blackfriars Bridge on CS6 in peak hours, with cycles now 70 per cent of traffic over the latter at peak times. Congestion in London is rising, due to a combination of increased private hire vehicles, internet deliveries and roadworks, and the Deputy Mayor for Transport recently reiterated to road.cc a commitment to cycling to tackle congestion.
London's new cycle highways will be better than before
The LCCI’s ideas to keep the rapidly-growing city moving include making cycle routes part time at peak hours, devolving commuter rail to Transport for London, using the river to move goods and passengers, building more river crossings, consolidating deliveries and moving deliveries at night.
Chief Executive of LCCI, Colin Stanbridge said: "I recognise that some of these measures won't be immediately palatable to some groups.
"But we have made too many decisions because something seems like a nice idea, the easier route, or the most environmentally friendly idea without really thinking through the consequences.
"Whilst a number of initiatives, such as retiming and consolidation, have an important role to play in reducing congestion, they can only provide part of the solution.
"We need to be radical, to look at whether outdated rules still serve a purpose and to build infrastructure that isn't just a stop gap solution."
Although the LCCI represents some major businesses, it can’t be said to be the voice of all London’s businesses, with more than 180 employers publicly backing the East-West Cycle Superhighway last year
.@standardnews @PippaCrerar with over 180 employers fully backing the CSH is this really accurate? pic.twitter.com/yMuTeXzRnd
— CyclingWorks (@CyclingWorksLDN) October 13, 2016
Andrew Gilligan tells Sadiq Khan: time is your enemy
Neither is this opinion one shared by those in charge of managing London’s roads, who see cycling as the solution to keeping a growing population moving, while reducing congestion and air pollution.
Garrett Emmerson, TfL’s Chief Operating Officer for Surface Transport, said: “There are a number of factors behind the levels of congestion. London’s success means that we are seeing rising levels of construction traffic, private hire vehicles and internet deliveries, alongside the essential work to improve the safety of our roads.
“We are making the most efficient use of our limited space by encouraging walking, cycling, public transport and essential traffic, and will continue to do this to ensure our roads benefit all Londoners."
Val Shawcross told road.cc there will be a new hierarchy of road user in London under the current mayor, Sadiq Khan, with pedestrians and cyclists prioritised, and space removed from private motor vehicles if necessary.
“You will find there are some areas where the road space is transferred from the private motorist to other healthier, environmentally friendlier, more efficient uses,” she said.
“You can get many more people down a narrow road on bikes than you can get in a car, so if we’re short of road space, we’re going to be making some rational decisions in the public interest.”
Earlier this week, after it emerged the Licensed Taxi Drivers' Association members joined a local protest against a proposed cycle route in North London the London Cycling Campaign's infrastructure campaigner, Simon Munk, raised concerns the city’s new Cycling and Walking Commissioner isn’t in the post yet.
He said: “We have a whole bunch of people with vested interests that want to roll back the clock. There’s a massive need for City Hall and a need for the public to keep saying: ‘we want this, we demand these [protected cycle routes]; this is what’s needed’.”
“Not just that we have to keep people safe and stop dying but also to make London a better and healthier place.”
Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.
Latest Comments
- amartin 6 min 43 sec ago
Vingegaard in yellow at the 2024 TdF? Someone get that picture editor a strong coffee now...
- the little onion 19 min 10 sec ago
There's nothing wrong per se with the dangerous cycling laws, in isolation and in themselves. The issue is that it is a distraction and a waste of...
- David9694 19 min 54 sec ago
Southampton City Council reverses decision on bollard...
- Jogle 49 min 19 sec ago
Overturned car blocks road in Jevington Another self-driving car accident https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/24760579.recap-overturned-car-blocks-roa...
- essexian 1 hour 45 min ago
Someone is lying........
- Mr Blackbird 1 hour 46 min ago
And my Vauxhall Insignia ( for which I pay road tax, despite being a cyclist) looks very shifty. I think it is because of the shape of the...
- Cathycycling 6 hours 32 min ago
The Gaciron W12BR-200 is impressive in terms of brightness, durability, and battery life, offering great value for money. I especially like the...
- wtjs 9 hours 40 min ago
You didn't mention The Scottish Dodge, whereby if, by witchcraft, you manage to force your HD video upon the reluctant Scottish Police and they...
- mdavidford 10 hours 54 min ago
When these were designed in to the new development near us the excuse was 'well if we didn't it would be impossible to get a rubbish truck in to...
- Rendel Harris 11 hours 51 min ago
I should get onto the Guinness Book of Records people then, as they have the world record slowest heart rate for a healthy person down as 26bpm,...
Add new comment
31 comments
Look whose on the Board of LCC - follow the money
Geoffrey Riesel
Chairman, Radio Taxis Group Ltd
Sorry. Once again it's LCCI....NOT LCC (London Cycling Campaign)
I'm surprised they didn't just say "tarmac over the River Thames, and turn it into a motorway through the centre of London" - there problem solved!
You might be onto something there!
Am i the only one who doesnt understand this article....
cycles now 70 per cent of traffic over the latter at peak times
+
The LCCI’s ideas to keep the rapidly-growing city moving (link is external) include making cycle routes part time at peak hours
= What?
Is the plan to remove the protective segregation when there are the most vulnerable people using the road
Bearing in mind that a cycle is legally allowed on the non cycle path area too?
Chief Executive of LCCI, Colin Stanbridge said:
"But we have made too many decisions because something seems like a nice idea, the easier route, or the most environmentally friendly idea without really thinking through the consequences."
Providing for cyclists is the "easier route"?! Shurely some mistake, as anyone who has actually tried to get decent cycle provision will readily testify. Building more roads, creating more motorised traffic, pollution, danger and deterring sustainable transport, however, is apparently a doddle.
As for not thinking through the consequences, Mr Stanbridge is clearly a master in that area. What could possibly be the results of not thinking through the consequences of making cycling more dangerous and less attractive? I wonder, as Mr Stanbridge clearly doesn't.
Begs the question of how the businessmen got to their exalted position. Couldn't possibly be by ignoring the consequences of their decisions on other people could it?
Yes - he said "A, B or C" not "A, B and C". It's still bollocks but not necessarily what you think he's saying.
The LCCI can just fuck off!
I'm absolutely sick of groups like this voicing their ill conceived, prejudicial opinions in the self righteous belief that they carry some weight because they represent business. The city should be run for the benefit of the people in it not designed to maximise profit making by minimising inconvenience to business vehicles.
I was a member of the FSB (Federation of Small Business) until I saw they were campaigning against the congestion charge with seemingly no consultation of members. When I contacted them to explain that I was all for the charge they basically told me that they were opposed to anything that increased costs for businesses. Externalities? Social responsibility? These things just don't register.
"The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around" - Mr Stanbridge would do well to ponder on this.
Chief Executive of LCCI, Colin Stanbridge said: "I recognise that some of these measures won't be immediately palatable to some groups.
"But we have made too many decisions because something seems like a nice idea, the easier route, or the most environmentally friendly idea without really thinking through the consequences."
The man is clearly a certified charlatan if he speaks about environmentally friendly policies so disparagingly. A menace to society.
Here's radical - how about not putting everything in London. Spread it all around a bit - Cardiff, Birmingham, Bristol, Manchester, Liverpool, Nottingham, Leeds, Leicester, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Glasgow - all sizable places many of which could do with investment & job opportunities... Then it reduces the pressure on London.
Shame it will never ever happen
How about Hull, high unemployment & low building costs, ideal for re-investment
OK! How about these as a way of reducing congestion.
You see, I can do stupid as well!
I must be daft to as I agree with some of those!
I don't think you are. Banning things is a bit much in many cases, and unlikely to be politically sustainable - but positive incentives like tax rebates can be a good way to encourage 'good' behaviour. It's the kind of measure that might be needed in a transport strategy to change entrenched behaviours.
It would be interesting what big cities, particularly London, might do if they had the powers to make such changes. National government is too timid, although the C2W scheme is an isolated example of a more progressive attitude. Probably doesn't do much on its own though - more a bung to existing middle-class cyclists?
Sorry, I don't think you're 'doing stupid' AT ALL.
All these points make complete sense. And anyone guaranteeing to implement the likes of these would certainly get my vote.
I don't think they've thought this through. If bicycle lanes revert to car lanes outside peak hours, how would delivery van drivers ever find anywhere to park while dropping off supplies at shops and offices? Where would signs announcing upcoming roadworks be put? Who would pay to have all the trash, that is currently swept into the bike lanes, actually be collected and taken away? The whole idea is ludicrous... Oh yeah, and also some extra cyclists would probably die, but until they get off their bikes, sit down at their desks and become lawyers or accountants or web designers, they don't matter economically.
It's a pity as, inbetween the dross, there's actually some ideas worth looking at (e.g. more use of the river for freight and passenger, delivery times and consolidation).
oops - double post, soz
The cities i've been in with useful passenger services on water seem all the more pleasant for it.
FYI Thames Clipper have recently ordered more boats (to be made on the IOW).
Also - It's sad that the photo heading this shows a two way SUPERhighway; cyclists should expect more, not less!
Please excuse the apathy overload in my post...
Making cycle routes part time at peak hours: Some cars seem to think they're entitled to use CSH already anyway, so that's not a new idea.
Devolving commuter rail to Transport for London: From where? I 'Commute' for almost 35 miles on my line. And what problem is this supposed to be a solution to?
Using the river to move goods and passengers: Brilliant idea! Lets have more boats on the Thames, because they can delivery right up to your door, can't they? And marine diesel is really clean too, right?
Building more river crossings: Which needs what, again? Oh yes, CONSTRUCTION LORRIES!!!
Consolidating deliveries and moving deliveries at night: Joined up thinking? Like that'll catch on. Don't a lot of businesses deliver late-night already? And how about enforcing the existing delivery times of 10am to 4pm instead of letting idiots park lorries all over the show at peak times?
Breathes.
Well it's a touch awkward that one of the LCCI's patron members is RBS who had this to say about cycling infrastructure
https://cyclingworks.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/rbs/
I reckon we widen all London roads to at least 4 lanes and remove all traffic lights and pedestrian crossings. traffic flow will be greatly improved and it will be a magical place to work and live.
So getting rid of permanent cycle paths and the congestion charge are the difficult options, are they? Are they sure about that?
LCC sponsored by Ford, Vauxhall, Shell, Texaco...
LCCI -
not LCC
Is this the same business group / think tank / bunch of idiots that suggested ripping up all railways and replacing them with buses?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11385017/...
No.
"But we have made too many decisions because something seems like a nice idea, the easier route, or the most environmentally friendly idea without really thinking through the consequences."
London is drowning in a sea of fumes, the spin to claim diesel cars were "greener" meant that Nitrous Oxide levels are scarily high and funnily enough all construction traffic, delivery trucks, busses and many private hire vehicles are diesel and this is killing people.
So the guy seems to know that by the fact he knows cycling is the most environmentally friendly solution but would rather kill people with more fumes by increasing traffic into the city. You have to look at the tobacco industry and how they knew about cancer long before they admitted it and how lead in petrol was known as a terrible idea from the start. If you knowingly chose an option that kills people surely there could be some corporate manslaughter charges going your way.
Pages