Congestion Charge

[coops]

I totally agree Harry!

[flecc]

Originally Posted by coops

I totally agree with you Harry!

Well, if everybody in Manchester including those running the scheme is as negative as the other contributors in this thread, it will fail of course.

It seems to be the old story of the glass half empty/half full.

Like Hal, I see buses on my feeder route almost empty most of the time. That's because three of them serve a loop route which one could just about serve. The reason for that is the benefit, not having to wait a long time for the next bus, and that's the difference with me, a willingness to acknowledge the benefit as much as the downside.

When cycling to my nearest shopping centre the main route is congested with fast traffic and the narrow cycle lane at the edge of the road has road island pinch points. But I don't have to use that, there's another cycle route running parallel on very quiet suburban roads which drops me just short of the supermarket, avoiding all traffic lights, that route found with the free cycle route maps, another benefit paid for by the congestion charge.
.

[HarryB]

Originally Posted by flecc

I think most of the difference must be due to population density and lack of North London space, since we did have more space for facilities in many areas, but I'd be surprised if things were quite as gloomy in the outer North London boroughs where there have more space, but I stand to be corrected.

There have been many gains and I still feel they far outweigh the negatives, and I certainly wouldn't want things back as they were.
.

What is odd is that cycling is worse in the outer reaches of North London. I do blame driver attitude for this. At least in inner London there is a grudging acceptance that we are here to stay. But if I appear angry it is because I am angry. I am not making a political point, my local council is Tory and they for example, have refused to implement 20 mph zones in our residential area. Why? Because there are no schools in the area. But they are wrong, there are three. Why can't get that right? Anyway I regularly get charged at by drivers going more than 30 or 40 mph down narrow residential roads. No wonder there are so few cyclists around here.

My route into London has been made worse by what I think is excessive traffic lights and bad phasing or at the very least exceptional incompetence in the phasing. If anybody cared it would be sorted out as the phasing wasn't like that 3 months ago. I could give you the example of Whitehall where a right hand turn is now banned - why haven't the lights been changed to reflect this? Instead we all wait while nobody moves, THEN the pedestrian cycle starts before we are all let through on a filter. Why is it that the road planners are never called to account?

Sorry to be negative but I see very little improvement and the only good thing has come about because there are more of us. But there are more of us in spite of the changes rather than because of the changes so the politicians can take no credit for the increase.

By the way I think Labour is committing electoral suicide by implementing the Manchester congestion charge. Let's hope there is proper consultation first.

PS I now realise I have been cycling in to London on and off since 1978 (as a young lad off to Sixth form college).

[HarryB]

Originally Posted by flecc

Well, if everybody in Manchester including those running the scheme is as negative as the other contributors in this thread, it will fail of course.

It seems to be the old story of the glass half empty/half full....

When cycling to my nearest shopping centre the main route is congested with fast traffic and the narrow cycle lane at the edge of the road has road island pinch points. But I don't have to use that, there's another cycle route running parallel on very quiet suburban roads which drops me just short of the supermarket, avoiding all traffic lights, that route found with the free cycle route maps, another benefit paid for by the congestion charge.
.

It is not to do with half full glasses - there doesn't need to be a congestion charge to get more people on their bikes (if that is what we want to do). The roads just need to be designed with us in mind and at the moment that is not happening and all the congestion charging in the world is not going to change that. Less traffic travelling faster on the roads or many more buses work against us as I have found in London. As I say I am sorry to be negative but that is the way I see it.

By the way I have tried to use the cycle routes but they are hopelessly difficult to follow and add an extra 10 minutes each way onto the journey. Some of them require you to go the wrong way up a one way street so you can imagine what I think of them and those that planned them!

Originally Posted by flecc

Like Hal, I see buses on my feeder route almost empty most of the time. That's because three of them serve a loop route which one could just about serve. The reason for that is the benefit, not having to wait a long time for the next bus, and that's the difference with me, a willingness to acknowledge the benefit as much as the downside..

But you would expect more frequent buses to be smaller and fuller, rather than larger and emptier. I could start a whole new thread about why the bus system works so badly...

[flecc]

I agree about the negatives Hal, but there are the many positives, though it seems you don't have any where you cycle. I just see that someone is trying to make things better after half a century of no-one doing anything, and so I'm prepared to be open minded about that.

Central London is a bit of a hopeless case of course, the roads are locked into the buildings and very little can be changed without blitzing it, so I'm at a loss to understand how cycling there could be improved without a congestion charge. Of course Ken had a plan for cycle through-routes, but the voters have stopped any chance of that by voting him out which has to be stupid, given that a chance of improvement is better than no chance at all.

As said, I would hate for things to go back to how they were in all the areas I use, the lack of cycle facilities, the belligerence of car drivers against the previous tiny minority of cyclists, the battered old buses and lousy eratic service, and the large numbers of buses on our primary east/west routes before the trams replaced many of them.

I'd like to see congestion charging in my zone to cut the traffic, the sooner the better.
.

[HarryB]

I should of course apologise for being quite so bad tempered about my cycle ride - there are of course some good points to the policy even if it is let down in the detail. In mitigation I have just come back from Belgium (near the boarder with Holland). What a joy it was being a cyclist there. Cycle lanes on almost every road and a good attitude towards the cyclist. What was telling was that almost no one wore I helmet. I saw two old boys on serious racers with helmets but that was it - nobody else. That says something about how safe they feel riding around. In fact I took my two 4 year-olds on the road to their friend's school (admittedly one on stabilisers) and they loved it - very proud of themselves too being proper cyclists. If I could get a job out there I would leave in an instant - a much better, healthier way of life.

[flecc]

Couldn't agree more there Hal, much of Northern Europe is infinitely more cycle friendly. I'm at a loss to understand for certain why, for in the 1940s and 1950s we were a cycling nation, car ownership being vanishingly small and the roads swarming with bikes at commuting times, providing a healthy living for an extensive trade.

For some reason our population seemed to be desperate to get motorised, first with cyclemotors, then scooters and finally cars, while the low countries, Germany and Denmark were quite content to continue using bikes even when they later owned cars.

I've only seen two influential differences. In many cases they had more space to create cycle facilities, where in our old and confined towns and cities and in much of our small island there was little space to do anything.

The other difference is a totally different attitude to new facilities. Propose a new airport or motorway here and the protesters are out on the streets. Propose them in many European countries and cities compete to get the facility with the enthusiastic backing of the local population.

Sorry to highlight it, but the response in this thread to the Manchester proposal is typical of that British attitude of course. It's why we still have such a rubbish railway system and main road network and why we are now running short of generating capacity, areas where those other countries make us look silly while having their cycling as well.
.

[carpetbagger]

If this government or the next is really serious about going green and improving transport then we have to have more designated cycling lanes not the painted jokes where you ride in and hit 3 parked cars forcing you out into the road..I think a lot of people would now be interested in ebikes given the price of fuel,but then take one look at the dangers of the road and scrap the idea. How many of us have had near misses recently ? If we want to get our children on their bikes we have to make it safe for them to do so.
My son is 17 and my wife argued about him using my powabyke to go to his girlfriends.Our road is a race track,as are lots of others and we need segregation from them.If we have congestion charges some of that money must be invested in cycleways.

[HarryB]

Originally Posted by flecc

Sorry to highlight it, but the response in this thread to the Manchester proposal is typical of that British attitude of course. It's why we still have such a rubbish railway system and main road network and why we are now running short of generating capacity, areas where those other countries make us look silly while having their cycling as well.
.

It is not that I oppose change I am definitely up for it but I cannot see how the congestion charge has helped. It has certainly hardened up attitudes here in London. I object on the fairness level. When it first started my rather rich friend said how wonderful it was jumping into a taxi (congestion charge free!) and wizzing across London. I pointed out the great number of proles that were either excluded from driving however great their need or having to pay £5 just so that she could have a quick journey. As a good socialist I think she saw the point I was making.

London's implementation is very poor. I don't even think it has even reduced congestion - I think it has moved congestion to other parts. One good thing with the Manchester scheme, to show they are learning, is that it will be in two parts, inner and outer. It is also aimed at rush hour commuting - another positive improvement.

I think Ken lost the plot by bringing in the western extension thus giving a 90% discount for those in it, so they could drive in the inner zone. Result -increased congestion in the inner zone.

At the risk of repeating myself I think if roads can be designed with cyclist in mind then we will encourage cycling. If you ask why people why they don't cycle they respond that it is too dangerous - and they are right. We are still designing stupid roads for cyclists (well here in North London anyway).

Boris has already got things moving here in London as now there is a trial is going ahead allowing cyclists up the one way roads - so they don't have to cycle round the houses as it were. One of the benefit of this was that cycling was discussed on the news for a whole day, mostly positively as well (it mostly showed up the motorists and their organisations as being mean spirited).

[HarryB]

Originally Posted by carpetbagger

If this government or the next is really serious about going green and improving transport then we have to have more designated cycling lanes not the painted jokes where you ride in and hit 3 parked cars forcing you out into the road..I think a lot of people would now be interested in ebikes given the price of fuel,but then take one look at the dangers of the road and scrap the idea. How many of us have had near misses recently ? If we want to get our children on their bikes we have to make it safe for them to do so.
My son is 17 and my wife argued about him using my powabyke to go to his girlfriends.Our road is a race track,as are lots of others and we need segregation from them.If we have congestion charges some of that money must be invested in cycleways.

I have an issues with segregated paths. It keeps us away from drivers - out of sight out of mind. So when we inevitably appear on the roads we get the "get out of my way, you have no right to be on the road" attitude that is holding back cycling. Far better to integrate us into the traffic with dedicated lanes which is possible on the vast majority of roads. The same fine as a you would get using a bus lane lane would help too. That this doesn't happen shows the lack of commitment to cycling - even with our supposedly cycle friendly Mayor(s) in London!

I completely agree with you about roads being used as a race track but the Police have a very poor attitude to road safety and we need to change that (but are probably unwilling to pay for it).