by SouthLondonDaddy » Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:31 pm
The problem with these policies is they tend to be driven by ideology, not by evidence.
How much additional congestion will result? What will be the impact on pollution? On journey times? On public transport?
Let's start from an analysis of the impact of existing cycle lanes; my impression is they are mostly empty outside of rush hour, but have caused havoc by bringing about more congestion, and therefore more pollution, at all times. Of course I could be wrong - but at least we should see some evidence to determine if that's the case, shouldn't we?
We were told that 20mph limits would make roads safer. Well, guess what, the study commissioned by the DfT concluded they don't. Yet more 20mph limits are being introduced all over London.
Page 64
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... report.pdf
this study has found no significant change in collisions and casualties, in the short term, in the majority of the case study areas (including the aggregated set of residential case studies). While some individual case study areas show a reduction in collisions / casualties when background trends are accounted for, these results are based on very small sample sizes and it is not possible to attach any confidence to their significance.
When bus lanes were removed around Vauxhall to make way for segregated cycle lanes, the Transport Watchdog warned it would result in more congestion for all and longer journey times for bus users. Guess what, they were ignored.
They have now added a segregated cycle lane on Park lane, northbound. Why not in Hyde Park?? The result is an empty cycle lane but a totally congested Park lane.
What evangelical tree huggers don't get is that more congestion means more pollution for all; it doesn't only penalise the evil motorists - it penalises all those who are forced to breathe the increased fumes resulting from the greater congestion.
I am all for penalising the unnecessary use of private cars. But
- these policies prioritise pushbikes and penalise public transport users; this is wrong, if it were only because way more people can use public transport than cycle
- not all motorists are evil villains who drive their diesel SUVs for the pleasure of polluting; many vehicles are delivery vans, trademen's vans etc which cannot be replaced by pushbikes or public transport.
The problem with these policies is they tend to be driven by ideology, not by evidence.
How much additional congestion will result? What will be the impact on pollution? On journey times? On public transport?
Let's start from an analysis of the impact of existing cycle lanes; my impression is they are mostly empty outside of rush hour, but have caused havoc by bringing about more congestion, and therefore more pollution, at all times. Of course I could be wrong - but at least we should see some evidence to determine if that's the case, shouldn't we?
We were told that 20mph limits would make roads safer. Well, guess what, the study commissioned by the DfT concluded they don't. Yet more 20mph limits are being introduced all over London.
Page 64 [url]https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/757307/20mph-headline-report.pdf[/url]
[i]this study has found no significant change in collisions and casualties, in the short term, in the majority of the case study areas (including the aggregated set of residential case studies). While some individual case study areas show a reduction in collisions / casualties when background trends are accounted for, these results are based on very small sample sizes and it is not possible to attach any confidence to their significance.[/i]
When bus lanes were removed around Vauxhall to make way for segregated cycle lanes, the Transport Watchdog warned it would result in more congestion for all and longer journey times for bus users. Guess what, they were ignored.
They have now added a segregated cycle lane on Park lane, northbound. Why not in Hyde Park?? The result is an empty cycle lane but a totally congested Park lane.
What evangelical tree huggers don't get is that more congestion means more pollution for all; it doesn't only penalise the evil motorists - it penalises all those who are forced to breathe the increased fumes resulting from the greater congestion.
I am all for penalising the unnecessary use of private cars. But
[list]
[*]these policies prioritise pushbikes and penalise public transport users; this is wrong, if it were only because way more people can use public transport than cycle
[*]not all motorists are evil villains who drive their diesel SUVs for the pleasure of polluting; many vehicles are delivery vans, trademen's vans etc which cannot be replaced by pushbikes or public transport.
[/list]