Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Council says it “did not manipulate data” after cycling campaigners accused it of ignoring advice in order to controversially shelve bike lane

Kensington and Chelsea Council was accused by campaigners of putting cyclists in danger, as the fight for the High Street cycle lane rumbles on

UPDATE: The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (RBKC), the local authority that controversially removed a protected cycle lane just seven weeks after it was installed, has refuted claims from active travel campaigners that it delayed a consultation process and manipulated data concerning public support for protected cycling infrastructure on Kensington High Street.

Last week, campaigners – who in March saw a legal challenge against what they believed to be the council’s “premature” removal of the cycle lane dismissed by a High Court judge – accused the authority of delaying taking action to protect cyclists and claimed on social media that the authority had “manipulated” the results of a survey of local residents to conclude that painted cycle lanes are more popular than protected ones.

In a statement to road.cc, RBKC denied manipulating the survey data and argued that it has not delayed a consultation process on the Kensington High Street cycle lane.

“We did not give any suggestion or timeline for consultation,” the statement said. “The Centre for London (CfL) report did not provide a readymade scheme that we could consult on. Our statement in response to the CfL report was published at the time, which said we would go to the Citizens’ Panel, which we did in January.

“We did not manipulate the data and the London Cycling Campaign (LCC) have not explained how they say we did. If you aggregated the three different types of protected cycle lane together, in the question about which type of lane would make people feel safest when cycling, that would add up to 42 percent, against 14 percent for painted lanes. This is what Rob Whitehead refers to.

“But we showed that two of the protected lane types scored higher than painted lanes. These are distinct questions and when we asked people how they feel about different types of cycle lane more generally, i.e. popularity of painted and protected cycle lanes, the report is very clear that in general 59 percent of respondents supported painted lanes, compared to 42 percent supporting protected lanes.

“On Kensington High Street itself, 43 percent supported painted bike lanes, compared to 31 percent supporting protected lanes.

“The decision not to reinstate cycle lanes was made in March 2021. Later that same year we commissioned research. Reports were then published in March 2022 and October 2022.”

You can read the original article below:

Campaigners have questioned the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) on the future of the Kensington High Street cycle lane, with the council, which has previously been accused of “choreographing” press statements against cycle lanes, replying that they “will have a think about it”, while also allegedly ignoring expert advice and manipulating consultation data for two years.

In December 2020 at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, RBKC controversially removed the protected cycle lane from Kensington High Street, just seven weeks into a scheduled 18-month trial and before construction on the scheme had been fully completed, after backlash from reportedly 0.2 per cent of the residents.

Earlier this week, active travel campaigners attended the council’s committee meeting and raised a demand for “no more delays” as they pressured the Conservative-controlled borough to bring back the protected cycle lane, claiming that there was “still no progress towards safe cycling on this dangerous road”.

Rachel, an NHS worker from Kensington and member of resident-group Better Streets for Kensington and Chelsea, said at the meeting: “It's now two and a half years since you took out the cycle lanes. I and thousands of others have to cycle daily on this dangerous road. Where is the sense of urgency? Does my safety not matter?”

> “Shameful, callous and retrograde”: 200 join protest against removal of Kensington High Street cycle lanes

After removing the cycle lane wands, the council commissioned a study by the think-tank Centre for London, with the subsequent report recommending the creation of a protected cycle lane, separated from motor traffic by either wands or raised kerbs, with the latter being the more preferred alternative.

However, RBKC, after cycling campaigners accused it of delaying commencing the consultation process for six months, added an option of painted cycle lanes in the survey, despite being “emphatically not recommended” by the report.

Rob Whitehead, from the Centre for London said: “At no point did Centre for London suggest painted line bike lanes are an appropriate solution to making journeys on Kensington High Street safer and more sustainable. Because they are not. They fail the DfT standard for safe cycling given the volume of motor vehicles. They just don't pass the smell test. Children aren't safe on them, and nor are adults.”

London Cycling Campaign has claimed on social media that the council manipulated the survey results to conclude that painted cycle lanes are much more popular than protected cycle lanes.

> Council officer edited business group’s press statement on removal of Kensington High Street bike lane

“The panel survey results look misused in an attempt to show that painted line bike lanes are favoured. Yet some of your own numbers don't support this. On safety the combined score of the protected options are favoured by 42% of respondents vs only 14% for painted lanes,” said Whitehead.

The campaigners have asked the council for urgent action. However, RBKC replied to them: “We have now done some sort of modelling and design work of what a lane could look like across the street… there are some decisions within that we are going to have to think about.”

LCC further added: “Urgency? What urgency? It’s been over two years since the cycle lanes were removed. No more delays. Kensington High Street needs to be made safe. Now.”

> Campaigners lose High Court case against council over “premature” cycle lane removal

The backlash against the council’s delay comes a month after campaigners lost their High Court case against RBKC over the “premature” removal of the cycle lane. The dismissal of their legal challenge was described as a “hollow victory by a borough that seems happy to put people cycling on its streets in danger”.

Better Streets for Kensington & Chelsea, who are also behind the legal action, claimed it to be an “irrational” and “clearly and radically wrong” decision which amounted to an “abuse of power” by the local council.

In March last year, RBKC's refusal to reinstate the emergency cycle lanes on Kensington High Street was condemned by Labour councillors as “completely bonkers”.

LCC campaigner Clare Rogers had said: “Kensington and Chelsea is clearly incapable of behaving as a responsible local authority for this highway, or following its own policies on road safety and the climate emergency.”

> PM Boris Johnson ‘ballistic’ over scrapping of Kensington High Street cycle lane

And just two months before that, an FOI request had revealed that RBKC had ‘choreographed’ press statements from local businesses when announcing the abandonment of the Kensington High Street segregated cycle lanes.

Forbes reported that RBKC attempted to coordinate the response to its announcement that the scheme would be abandoned with its head of news editing what was supposed to be an independent press statement from the chair of Kensington Business Forum (KBF).

An initial quote from KBF said: “We had hoped, like many others that the temporary cycle lanes would have been a success but unfortunately due to the current climate it has not benefited our High Street businesses.”

This was tweaked to say: “Like many others, we hoped the initiative would be a success. Unfortunately it has not helped our High Street businesses attract customers at a vital time for them, so it is good news that the lanes will be removed.”

An RBKC spokesperson said: “Agreeing statements with partners, community groups, and stakeholders in advance of announcements is standard practice.”

> Motor traffic journey times increase after Kensington cycle lanes removed

During the seven weeks of installation of the bike path, cyclist numbers more than doubled to about 3,000 daily along the busy A-road, with Transport for London saying that it had “no discernible effect on traffic congestion”.

However, since its removal, TfL’s traffic cameras showed that congestion had worsened, with average trip times on the 1.1-mile stretch of the road rising by more than two minutes when travelling east, and almost a minute for cars travelling west.

Besides worsening congestion, there are numerous accounts of footage proving how dangerous the road is for cyclists, who have to squeeze their way through the motor traffic on a key route into central London for people coming from the west.

At the time of the removal of the bike lane in December 2020, there were protests by teachers, parents and pupils at a nearby school pleading the council to keep it in place. The Mayor of London Sadiq Khan also reportedly condemned the decision, while then Prime Minister Boris Johnson was said to have gone “ballistic” about it.

Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after completing his masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Cymru, and also likes to write about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.

Add new comment

31 comments

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to ITK2012 | 1 year ago
3 likes

Less savoury countries?  Have you not seen our government recently?  Well, any time in the past thirteen years actually.

Pages

Latest Comments