Category Archives: Traffic

More Congestion in the City

Posted on by
Reply

We have covered the worsening congestion in the City of London arising from the works around Aldgate and the impact of the new Cycle Superhighways during 2015. But it is going to get worse in 2016.

There will be in addition be major works that will close the junction of Aldgate, Leadenhall Street and Fenchurch Street requiring that all three roads be closed from January to April.

In addition Tower Bridge will be closed to “re-deck” the bascules (the raising part of the road surface). This is likely to take place in Q4 2016 and will require traffic on the inner ring road to be diverted via the Congestion Charge zone to use Southwark or London Bridges.

The end of 2016 might also see a closure of Bank junction (see previous blog post on that topic).

Note that the Highways Team in the City of London Corporation now have their own Facebook page (see https://www.facebook.com/Squarehighways) and Twitter feed so you can easily give them your comments on news items.

There is one thing for certain in 2016 – road users will find life more difficult in the City.

Roger Lawson

Are Cyclists Racing on London’s Streets?

Posted on by
7

Are cyclists racing against each other on London’s streets? This was a question raised in a letter to the Daily Telegraph this morning (29/12/2015) by Gareth Hayton following previous letters about speeding cyclists putting pedestrians at risk. His answer was yes because he said if you go to the internet and search for “Strava segment Embankment” it shows you that cyclists are recording their times on the stretch of road along the Embankment from the City to the West End (part of the http://www.strava.com web site).

The “winner” in the Men’s category at the time of writing is Tom Moses with a time of 3 minutes and 9 seconds which it gives as an average speed of 58.7 kph (i.e. 31.7 miles per hour). Apart from the fact that there are several traffic lights and pedestrian crossings on that stretch of road, clearly Mr Moses is exceeding the 30 mph speed limit along that road.

These timings can be recorded automatically by mobile phone apps or GPS products and there are large numbers of recordings being submitted – for example there are 247,000 records on the Westminster to Millbank segment of the same road.

As the writer to the Telegraph said “Many cyclists are racing, not just on roads, but on paths and tracks throughout the country every day, with complete disregard to others“. This activity is of course illegal. Cycle races of any kind have to be authorised by the police, and as pointed out above, speed limits are obviously being broken. Note also that “cycling furiously” is a criminal offence under the 1847 Town Police Clauses Act or under the  Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and there have been past cases prosecuted under those laws.

So if you wonder why cyclists are often the source of accidents to both themselves and others, now you know. They may be competing to get into the record books!

Roger Lawson

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

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

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

Minicabs and Rickshaws Under Attack

Posted on by
Reply

Boris Johnson is planning to cap the number of minicabs in London. Along with the growth of usage of cab hailing apps such as Uber, the use of minicabs has been rising rapidly in the last couple of years. This is allegedly contributing to worse traffic congestion.  For example the number of licensed minicabs has grown by 20% in the last year to reach 78,000.

A Uber spokesperson was quoted in the FT  as saying “It would means higher prices, fewer jobs and would actually result in more congestion as people resort to using their own car again in the City”.

The Licensed Taxi Drivers Association, who represent black cab drivers, supported the move. They have been very critical of the rise of minicabs, and pursued a court action to challenge the legality of the use of booking apps.

Boris Johnson is also looking to ban rickshaws which clog up streets in the evenings in Central London and are a potential hazard, but does not currently have the legal powers to do so. He is looking to the Government to assist on that.

Meanwhile the head of Britain’s largest minicab company, Addison-Lee, has attacked the new licensing regime for taxis that will apply from 2018 (as part of the plans for the ultra-low emission zone). This requires all taxis to be zero-emissions capable by 2018.  Mr Griffin of Addison-Lee says the vehicle types required to meet this legislation do not exist – which in essence probably means electric only vehicles, not hybrids.

Comment: if a limit is placed on London minicab licenses, surely they will just be based outside of London and drive in when required. It is not clear how this legislation can be easily enforced unless cabs from outside London are to be banned. Of course this is one of the unintended consequences of the London Congestion Tax (a.k.a. “Charge”), which encouraged people to switch to buses, taxis and cycling. All three create more congestion and the first two are usually more polluting than private cars  – which is why we still have a NOX problem.

Roger Lawson

TfL Consultation on the Stockwell Gyratory

Posted on by
Reply

Transport for London (TfL) have launched a public consultation on proposals to revise the Stockwell Gyratory road system.

Details of the Stockwell proposals and how you can respond are here: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/betterjunctions/stockwell-cross

The proposed changes include:  Removing the gyratory and simplifying the road layout ; further improving facilities for cyclists along, and leading to, the well-used Barclays Cycle Superhighway Route 7 (CS7); landscaping Stockwell Memorial Garden and closing part of South Lambeth Road to create an improved public space.

However the removal of the gyratory will delay vehicular traffic. Widening of bus lanes and more provision for cyclists will also reduce road space. Unfortunately the general policy now pursued by TfL is to remove gyratory roads and the results (such as at Aldgate) has often been much increased traffic congestion and longer journey times. No cost/benefit justification is provided for such changes.

Anyone who uses this junction in Stockwell would be advised to study the proposals and made a response a.s.a.p.

Roger Lawson

East-West Cycle Superhighway, and Transparency Consultation

Posted on by
Reply

Our last Newsletter covered the proposals for a new East-West Cycle Superhighway along the Embankment and Upper/Lower Thames Street.  Readers of the last newsletter were urged to strongly oppose the proposal which would reduce a lot of the road to one lane, increase traffic congestion and substantially increase journey times based on Transport for London’s (TfL’s) own predictions. This article is an update on the status of these proposals.

This writer wrote personally to the Mayor, Boris Johnson, on the 5th October explaining what was wrong with those proposals and suggesting he needs “to listen to the general population, not to a prejudiced minority of cycling fanatics”. I pointed out that there has not been a proper cost/benefit analysis of the proposals and the public consultation was grossly defective. I also made it very clear I would not be voting for any candidate for Mayor of London who supports these proposals.

Just before Xmas I got a response from Mr Johnson. Among the statements therein are:

“The route of the East-West Superhighway has been chosen to minimise impacts on other users…”.

“The proposed cycle track would, for the most part, replace only one traffic lane”.

“TfL continues to assess the potential impacts of the proposals…..”.

The fact that not all the route is reduced to one lane surely does not help. If you introduce bottlenecks on a major thoroughfare the overall capacity of the route is reduced.

Meanwhile in mid-November Howard Dauber of the Canary Wharf Group appeared on BBC TV News spelling out the objections to the scheme. In particular he stated that the “mitigation” measures being considered by TfL imply the holding back of traffic on main arterial routes. So for example using traffic light control to reduce traffic entering this route from the East (i.e. from Canary Wharf!). Mr Dauber seems to be trying to generate wider opposition to the scheme, and may be developing alternative proposals.

The City of London Corporation have also considered the matter and raised a number of objections. For example, they expressed concerns about the impact on pedestrians, and that TfL should “consider alternative design measures to ensure a resilient road network and demonstrate how the network will accommodate planned and unplanned road works“. They also asked for more time for consultation and a different approach by TfL when such major proposals are being developed (like everyone else, they don’t like being presented with an almost final design without any prior consultation).

Incidentally on the latter subject, TfL have issued a public consultation on “Transparency” about how they wish to be “open and accountable”. As one of the least open and accountable organisations in this writers personal experience, you may like to submit your own comments as I have done. TfL’s public consultations tend to be more of a PR exercise that real public engagement, with the key decisions already set in stone.

Will TfL and the Mayor listen? We wait to see, and the results of the public consultation on the East-West Superhighway are yet to be published.

Note that I have also taken up this issue with my GLA Member and my Member of Parliament (I think it is a national issue as well as just a London issue when the capital’s road network is being destroyed by political dogma).

Roger Lawson

Removing bus lanes in Liverpool and London

Posted on by
Reply

Liverpool has surely set an example that other major cities might like to follow. The City council and Mayor have decided to permanently remove 22 or the 26 bus lanes in the City, most of which are on radial routes. The four remaining ones will now only operate for limited hours rather than the previous 24 hours. This follows a trial since last October on which the Mayor commented: “Now for the first time we have robust data about the effect of bus lanes, rather than people’s opinions about how useful or otherwise they are”.

But the council is considering other proposals to assist buses such as traffic signal priority and the introduction of red routes to stop obstructive parking.

Comment:  Would it not be a good idea for London councils to take the same approach, i.e. remove bus lanes and see what the impact is? This writer could never understand the moral principle of allowing bus users to jump a queue of other vehicles. Why should public transport users get any priority? That is particularly the case when bus lanes are rarely fully occupied by buses so they often simply reduce the total capacity of the road network to move people around a City.

Of course Councils are often in favour of bus lanes because they generate large amounts of revenue from infringements which in London can be automated via cameras. Many of those infringements are often accidental or of a nature where no bus is impeded (for example a car turning left via a bus lane when the road is clear to the exit).