Author Archives: Freedom for Drivers Foundation

Bank Junction to be Closed?

Posted on by
Reply

The City of London Corporation is considering various options for changes to Bank road junction in the City. This is the key road junction outside the Bank of England which is the central hub of roads in the City and used by many bus routes. It is typically heavily congested and because of the narrow pavements is also the scene of many pedestrian accidents. Neither is it cyclist friendly of course. There were 118 casualties of all kinds in the last 5 years, mainly to pedestrians from them walking into the road while ignoring the traffic, including one fatality.

Two of the options considered in a report by the Corporation’s staff are complete closure, or the closure of all East-West movements, although they concede that the latter might not get the support of TfL. Other options include removing Poultry and Cornhill or simply reducing capacity by 50% on all arms.

But they are keen to remove all traffic other than buses and as a result enhance Bank as a “place”, effectively removing it from its purpose as part of the road network. An interim “experimental” scheme might allow pedal cycles and buses only through the junction during working hours, but there should be a full public consultation in due course. The overall view of the “Streets and Walkways” Sub-Committee who considered the proposals was that “the proposals should be supported, however the changes should not be at the expense of diminishing traffic flow through the city“. But how is that to be achieved is a key question.

Definitely a project to keep an eye on because this could be as damaging as the pedestrianisation of Trafalgar Square, or the changes in the Aldgate area, to the road network in London. Removing road space in one location just moves the traffic onto other roads of course, which are typically already congested. Modelling of the result of a local scheme often ignores these wider impacts.

Roger Lawson

Lambeth Reopens Loughborough Junction Roads

Posted on by
Reply

Lambeth Council have reopened four of the six roads they closed around Loughborough Junction, allegedly in response to a formal complaint from the London Fire Brigade. However there was an enormous amount of public opposition to the closure under an “experimental traffic scheme” that was due to last six months. The scheme frequently created gridlock and a worse environment than before.

A steering group has now been formed of stakeholders, including a group named “LJ Road Madness” who opposed the scheme and who have a Facebook page if you wish to support them. They would like the two remaining roads reopened also.

Comment: It just shows that it pays to complain and get opposition organised if your local council comes up with plans that you disagree with. London councils are often dominated by a certain kind of person (and I am talking here about both councillors and council staff) who would like to remove all road vehicles from our streets, to the enormous inconvenience of most residents and those who have to go about their business such as delivering goods, and that’s not counting the needs of the emergency services. If you need advice on how to tackle such problems, just send us an email or give us a call. See the Contact page of our web site here: http://www.freedomfordrivers.org/Contact.htm

Roger Lawson

Boris More Damaging than the Blitz, and Age Discriminatory

Posted on by
Reply

Lord Lawson, a former Chancellor of the Exchequer (and no relation to the writer although folks often call me Nigel), said in the House of Lords last week (14/12/2015) that what is happening now “has done more damage, and is doing more damage, to London than almost anything since the Blitz“. He was referring to the “Mayor’s addiction to cycling” and the introduction of the Cycle Superhighways by Boris Johnson and Transport for London.

He also suggested that the current support of cycling was hugely age discriminatory because there is a huge section of the population of a certain age (well represented in the House of Lords of course) for whom cycling is not a practical option.

Lord Higgins complained about the “appalling increases in congestion and pollution caused by the introduction of bicycle lanes” and suggested they should be shared instead during most of the day. He particularly referred to Lower Thames Street where he suggested “they are likely to die from carbon monoxide poisoning” or other pollution any moment now.

Comment: Lord Lawson hit the nail on the head. Since the road works to put in the East-West Cycle Superhighway have reduced traffic to one lane from two there has been a massive increase in congestion across the whole of central London. Queues on the Embankment and Upper/Lower Thames Street can back up for miles in peak periods and even during off-peak periods there are long delays. In addition traffic is diverting to other routes to travel East/West causing congestion in the City and West End. Indeed the whole central London road network has been seriously degraded.

It does of course affect all traffic so even bus users have suffered as a result. This situation will not get better when the road works have finished.

Roger Lawson

Westminster Bridge – More Road Space to be Removed

Posted on by
Reply

Transport for London (TfL) are consulting on changes to Westminster Bridge and to the roads at the southern end. It includes the removal of road space for traffic to create reserved space for cyclists.

Westminster Bridge will be reduced to one lane for ordinary traffic and even the white “centre-line” demarcating lanes on the bridge is to be removed.

See picture of how it might look.Westminster Bridge Proposed.png

You can object to these proposals by going to this web page: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/westminster-bridge-south?cid=westminster-bridge-south

But you need to do so before the 22nd December!

Roger Lawson

Croydon 20 Mph Speed Limit – Council Pushes Ahead

Posted on by
Reply

 

The London Borough of Croydon is pushing ahead with a wide area 20 mph speed limit in North Croydon, and has now published their formal public notice for its plans. But it is still not too late to stop this misconceived proposal. If you live in the area, or drive through it, make sure you submit something in writing to the council. simply send an email to mailto:parking.design@croydon.gov.uk  quoting reference PS/CH/Y86 before the 24th December!

Note that the public consultation that the council undertook on this scheme was the subject of fraud which is very obvious from the differing responses via the web and via post – the councillors have ignored complaints on that issue and are pushing it through regardless. It is very clear that without the fraud, the majority of residents are opposed to a 20 mph limit.

Roger Lawson

Ealing 20 Mph Zone

Posted on by
Reply

The London Borough of Ealing is proposing a wide area 20 mph speed limit in Acton. You can read more about it and respond to the consultation (which ends on the 18th December so you need to get your comments in quickly) here: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/info/200628/current_consultations/2059/acton_20_mph_speed_limit_trial_consultation

This is a “trial” scheme, but if successful is likely to be rolled out across all of the borough. From past experience such trial schemes are rarely rolled back simply because of the money spent on implementing them.

We have consistently opposed wide area 20 mph schemes because there is no evidence of road safety benefits. In fact the council are pre-empting a study which has been commissioned by the DfT on such schemes, but evidence from existing ones make any benefits appear to be very unlikely. Indeed in some schemes, accidents have increased. Although traffic speeds may be reduced by 1 mph (on average) in such schemes, that is hardly noticeable by most people.

But it can add significantly to journey times and put you at risk of collecting a speeding fine for driving at what you might consider a safe speed. The council’s supportive arguments are full of dubious claims, such as that it will reduce traffic congestion – that is simply nonsense as there is no evidence whatsoever to support that. Likewise they say lower speed limits will encourage cycling and walking, which might be beneficial if it was true, but again there is no evidence of such effects in existing schemes.

The council does not tell you what this scheme will cost in the consultation material, but it will be expensive. And it will be a waste of money that would be better spent on other road safety projects.

So please make sure you object if you live in the borough, or drive through it.

London Road Network – Vauxhall Cross and Wandsworth Town Centre Changes

Posted on by
Reply

As part of the London “Road Modernisation Programme”, Transport for London are consulting on some major changes to the Vauxhall Cross gyratory system. As anyone who has driven through the area south of Vauxhall Bridge knows well, this part of the London road network is both confusing to drivers who are not familiar with it, and also the scene of a lot of traffic congestion. It is also particularly dangerous for cyclists due to the speed of traffic and the numerous lane changes that are required. Pedestrians are also faced with confusing and indirect routes. So an improved design will surely be welcome.

The changes involve a major reconfiguration of the roads in that area to introduce two-way working. More cycle and pedestrian crossings will be provided and some segregated lanes for cyclists. Public spaces will be improved and a new central bus station provided.

The impact on vehicle journey times will be mixed with some routes slower and some faster.

Anyone who uses Vauxhall Cross should certainly look at the public consultation which is here: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/vauxhall-cross and of course submit your comments. You might like to let us have your comments also. Note that one of the basic things that all consultations should include for any road scheme is a cost/benefit analysis which is absent.

Wandsworth Town Centre

Transport for London are also consulting on a major change to Wandsworth Town Centre which will also remove the existing gyratory system. The changes include:

– Rerouting traffic away from the town centre by making Armoury Way two-way. Through traffic would bypass Wandsworth High Street by using Putney Bridge Road, Armoury Way, Swandon Way and Trinity Road.

– Making the High Street a more pleasant environment by allowing only buses and cyclists to use the section between Buckhold Road and Garrett lane, and restricting the rest of it to local traffic only.

– Providing better pedestrian crossings.

– Extending Cycle Superhighway Route 8 to run along Wandsworth High Street.

– Making Wandsworth Plain two-way.

According to the journey time forecasts, vehicle times might actually reduce while cyclists and pedestrian journey times appear to increase substantially (but they may be safer of course), which might not please all of them.

See https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/wandsworth-town-centre?cid=wandsworth-town-centre for more information and to respond to the consultation. But again there is no cost/benefit analysis of these proposals, even though they may improve the attractiveness and use of the town centre.

Roger Lawson 06/12/2015

Police Forces Bending Rules for Profit

Posted on by
Reply

We have issued the following press release:

“As Chancellor George Osbourne cancels plans to cut police funding we call upon Bedfordshire Police and Crime Commissioner Olly Martins to immediately withdraw threats to make up the police budget by using zero tolerance enforcement of the 70mph motorway limit.  PCC Martins planned to use cameras intended to enforce variable limits at times of congestion, switching them on at 70MPH and using the increased profits (over and above the profits his force already make from speed cameras) to make up the shortfall in funding. We call on the government to urgently enshrine in law National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC – formerly ACPO) guidelines that a tolerance of 10%+ 2mph be applied to all speed enforcement and for police to be banned from misusing variable limit cameras intended only to reduce congestion on motorways to enforce the 70mph limit.”

Note that the corruption of the police force by drivers paying to avoid prosecution has been covered in our past newsletters and the legal issues associated with this practice are being actively examined.

Roger Lawson

Gallions Reach and Belvedere River Crossings

Posted on by
Reply

Transport for London (TfL) have issued a public consultation on new Thames River crossings at Gallions Reach and Belvedere in East London. That’s in addition to the new tunnel at Blackwall which is already being progressed (the Silvertown tunnel). They might replace the Woolwich Ferry although the purchase of new ferry boats is planned so as to enable the ferry to continue into the 2020s. It might, of course, be a number of years before any new bridges or tunnels are actually built and come into use – that’s assuming they get through the complex planning processes on such projects and political support by the Mayor of London continues.

The public consultation gives some more information about the proposed new crossings – both bridges and tunnels are under consideration. They would of course support road vehicles including buses and also possibly cyclists and pedestrians (a token gesture perhaps as it would be a long walk). In addition they might support an extension of the DLR to Thamesmead which would be exceedingly useful for residents of that area as it would give them easy access to Canary Wharf and central London but would add substantially to the cost. Another alternative is a tram but that seems somewhat irrational as there is no tram network in the area and it is not clear why that would be even considered when buses are cheaper and more flexible.

Vehicle users would almost certainly be charged to use the bridges or tunnels. Traffic impacts would be variable depending on the roads concerned with heavier traffic on some local roads and lighter on others. But journey time reductions would be significant, e.g. 40 minutes less from Thamesmead to Barking, and 20 minutes less from Rainham to Erith.

The likely cost of these crossings is given as about £1 billion each, although the consultation web site is remarkably short on detail costings and other information.

However, to give your opinion on the proposals, please go to this web page: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/rivercrossings/east-of-silvertown?cid=east-london-crossings as soon as possible.

Roger Lawson

Croydon Still Raking It In From Video Cameras

Posted on by
Reply

Despite the Deregulation Act 2015 severely restricting the use of mobile video cameras to enforce parking restrictions, they are still being used to penalise moving traffic offences. Croydon Council has been making lots of money from their use in a spy car to police a width restriction in Waddon Way. It issued 765 Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) between June and September 2015 for “failing to give way” (offence code 37J) at that location.

Waddon Way Croydon Edited

Waddon Way is a short cut used by a lot of traffic and an artificial width restriction with “one way working” was introduced by the Council. As in many other locations where such measures have been installed, this resulted in numerous accidents and confrontations – indeed some councils have subsequently removed them. But Croydon Council, now controlled by the Labour Party, would prefer to make money from it instead.

We have opposed the use of these traffic calming arrangements and using mobile camera cars to enforce them is exceedingly dubious. Unless there is an actual accident, it is debateable that an offence has been committed in many cases. But the usual principle of camera operators is to issue a PCN regardless and force the recipient to contest it, i.e. you are assumed to be guilty until you prove yourself to be innocent, which is an inversion of real justice. And surely using cameras to police moving traffic offences should also be banned.

Roger Lawson