Centralised discussion space for TfL plans and cycling in London

Posted on
of 11
First Prev
/ 11
  • Swiss Cottage is in Camden and the actual borough are quite keen to do something about it. It was only because it was bolted onto the doomed CS11 project that it didn't go ahead. No idea about current timescales though.

  • The similarity is in that small groups of well connected and organised people. Are able stop something that is essentially positive.
    This is where things need to built quickly.
    Cw9 is hasn't started yet and it's been perhaps a decade since it was first envisaged.

  • Here's what I consider a poorly thought-out modal filtering scheme, in Hammersmith and Fulham (although in principle I support the attempt, I think it will cause knock-on problems):


    The impetus behind it is completely understandable--you can easily see by looking at a map how it would be used as a rat-run, probably (I don't know the area well) used by drivers avoiding Wandsworth Bridge Road. 400 vehicles an hour on a residential street is extreme--the peak must be in rush hour traffic, but it may be more constant throughout the day for all I know.

    So, it's good the council wants to do something about it, but as ever you have to filter a traffic cell completely, not go about it by partial measures. There's evidently no political will to filter the whole cell (which is very large and features numerous large trip generators like hotels, a lot of bad development around Chelsea Harbour with lots of car parking garages, etc.), so that there will continue to be a lot of through motor traffic via Chelsea Harbour and, as the article mentions, Bagley's Lane. In the area, you see the typical signs of various isolated filters being installed in partial response to existing rat-runs, e.g. in Bagley's Lane outside the Queen Elizabeth. I'm sure that one would have brought some relief when it was installed, but today, with sat nav systems available, I'm sure more drivers than before are finding their rat-running way via streets like Broughton Road or Broughton Road Approach towards Pearscroft Road and Bagley's Lane, and numerous other possibilities, as nothing is filtered completely.

    I read about it in this article:


    I can't find anything about the 'SW6 traffic campaign' and so don't know what their aims are.

  • Feel like 'zero emission street' is some buzzy marketing concept. Will be interesting to see what effect this will have on the road itself and the surrounding roads also.


  • Khan with some bullshit PR fluff? Never!

  • The guardian article doesn't mention that as well as refuse and deliveries there'll be an exemption for the residential and public parking off beech st, and I'm sure taxis will force an exemption for themselves.
    Doesn't sound zero in anyway to me.

  • Yeah, expect little to change on the ground. Showboating rather than the proven bung in a kerb and sort out junction priority.

  • A somewhat disappointing article in the guardian today - especially in its use of the term "traffic":

    Makes me think - what books or substantial definitive sources are available for an average person to understand "traffic" (meaning people movement) in an urban context, its complex linkages to trip generation, trip making, mode choice, road danger, public realm, and more modern terms like traffic evaporation. If you've got any suggestions for a reading list let me know

  • I've been writing one for a while ... but yes, it's not easy, especially if you want to avoid constant number-crunching, and to explain it from scratch. ETA probably sometime in the next millennium. :)

    But the main reason why there continue to be problems (London is known to have been congested in Roman times, it's not new) is because it has become increasingly over-centralised, e.g. with all those new tower blocks. There are other trends, e.g. the stay-at-home trend, but they're not enough to offset the process of over-centralisation and, of course, the tremendous increase in population. With an increase in population, in theory local areas should be revived because of higher density and people should be able to live closer to where they work, study, shop, etc. However, that always runs up against bad planning, bad transport planning, and bad development, all of which London has in jolly abundance.

  • Oh, and on this ...

    For McNamara, there is a clear class dimension to the debate: “The myth of the anti-car lobby is that it’s someone in a Rolls-Royce flicking cigar ash out of the window at the cyclists. It’s the working class that are driving the commercial vehicles in central London, and they are being forced out by the wealthy inner-London elite, who can afford to live in Islington and want to ride their bike to St Pancras.

    ... see:


  • Hah that's an entertaining cartoon. Good luck with the book Oliver! Let us know if you need it peer reviewed!

    You raise some interesting points - and I don't think there are (m)any quick solutions. For me, it'll be interesting to follow how the city of london continue to put in place better measures for walking and cyling and restricting motorised journeys, and to see how or if "liveable" neighbourhoods spread across London - assuming they are delivered as low (motorised) traffic neighbourhoods. But still a long way to go, and centralisation is unlikely to be unpicked anytime soon.

    I'm going to get hold of Carlton Reid's Roads were not built for cars, and maybe I'll learn something

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview

Centralised discussion space for TfL plans and cycling in London

Posted by Avatar for skydancer @skydancer