Congestion Charge

[flecc]

I agree on much of what you say Hal, but I'm also happy with the benefits.

Certainly there is much that is cycle unfriendly, but in London it's trying to get a quart into a pint pot that's much of the problem. It's not just cyclists who have to be catered for, and those road island pinch points you complain that are being added are there to give the elderly, mums with prams etc a chance of crossing very busy fast wide roads.

While I agree with this comment of yours:

"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."

It doesn't equate with what you complained earlier:

"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!"

and I think that highlights the impossibilities that I mention.

I do know though that we have definitely benefited more in the south than you have. In my area the trams are often packed with people who would formerly have been on the convoys of double deckers that clogged some routes, much of the tram route being either off road or on old railway routes.

If you had that sort of thing you'd be able to see the advantages of course, as you would if you had some cycle routes like this, with multiple toucan crossings bypassing the fast roundabouts.

Although not obvious, there's 9 lanes there, a service road for the houses, a two lane each way dual carriageway for the cars, the cycle lane, the pedestrian way, and behind the railings on the left are the two way tram lines. And it's appeared in this London Mayor and congestion charge decade.
.

 

[carpetbagger]

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).

I think that wherever possible segregated paths are better.For more experienced cyclists dedicated lanes are fine...but to get our children back on two wheels we need decent paths alongside roads where they are relatively safe whilst 'learning their trade' so to speak.

I think the Police have a difficult job with too many financial restraints.How often do you see police catching some celebrity,,then the famous lawyer gets them off on a technicality...what sort of message does that send to every other driver...its not the Police who are an ass....its the law !!!

 

[HarryB]

It's not just cyclists who have to be catered for, and those road island pinch points you complain that are being added are there to give the elderly, mums with prams etc a chance of crossing very busy fast wide roads.

While I agree with this comment of yours:

"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."

It doesn't equate with what you complained earlier:

"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!"

and I think that highlights the impossibilities that I mention.

I do know though that we have definitely benefited more in the south than you have. In my area the trams are often packed with people who would formerly have been on the convoys of double deckers that clogged some routes, much of the tram route being either off road or on old railway routes.

If you had that sort of thing you'd be able to see the advantages of course, as you would if you had some cycle routes like this, with multiple toucan crossings bypassing the fast roundabouts.

Although not obvious, there's 9 lanes there, a service road for the houses, a two lane each way dual carriageway for the cars, the cycle lane, the pedestrian way, and behind the railings on the left are the two way tram lines. And it's appeared in this London Mayor and congestion charge decade.
.

A few points.

The islands I complain about are catagorically not for pedestrian. They have no ramp and are just curbed islands. They are all over the place on my route to work. Of course I can see that there need to be crossing points and pedestrians need to be catered for.

There is no inconsistancy with the one way streets issue. I gave up using the routes because I would have gone up the one way system the wrong way. Illegal and likely I would have been deliberately run off the road. Well done the council for suggesting that it is crazy to expect cyclists to follow the same route as traffic and allowing going wrong way one way working. New rule and welcome.

Finally I am envious of all the cycling infrastructure you have but I think it has a lot more to do with your local council's attitude than any work of Ken (who was generally neutral towards cycling - except for all the lip service!). I do stand to be corrected on this though.

 

[flecc]

A few points.

The islands I complain about are catagorically not for pedestrian. They have no ramp and are just curbed islands. They are all over the place on my route to work. Of course I can see that there need to be crossing points and pedestrians need to be catered for.

It that case it's just traffic calming and daft as you say Hal. We have the same pinch point islands but always with pedestrian crossing incorporated. many of them are the long dog leg safety type with railings so people can't just run straight across, they have to do a left and right in the middle

Finally I am envious of all the cycling infrastructure you have but I think it has a lot more to do with your local council's attitude than any work of Ken (who was generally neutral towards cycling - except for all the lip service!). I do stand to be corrected on this though.

Absolutely not, the Croydon Cycling Campaign are always attacking the council over their negative attitudes and some of the daft traffic decisions they take. This is almost all TfL work, the Trams as a PPP initially but now taken over by TfL. The bus, bus shelter and main route Toucan crossings have to be TfL of course.

We do have 20 mph zones at all school points but we had to push the council into instituting adequate ones, and they've spoilt some of them for cyclists by including the sharp edged "chocolate block" type of traffic calming platforms.

But really Hal, to say Ken has been neutral towards cycling simply doesn't stand examination and is grossly unfair. He is the one who has driven the cycle lane budget upwards against the GLC council opposition, it reaching £24 million in some years. He also instigated the free cycle route maps for London against opposition. He is the one who has driven the cycle parking facilities against opposition from many local councils, and it was he who started the full page advertising campaign to get cyclists treated better by other road users. He is the one who proposed cycle "motorways" and the Paris style cycle hire scheme, now both dead since he hasn't been elected.
.

 

[carpetbagger]

It that case it's just traffic calming and daft as you say Hal. We have the same pinch point islands but always with pedestrian crossing incorporated. many of them are the long dog leg safety type with railings so people can't just run straight across, they have to do a left and right in the middle



Absolutely not, the Croydon Cycling Campaign are always attacking the council over their negative attitudes and some of the daft traffic decisions they take. This is almost all TfL work, the Trams as a PPP initially but now taken over by TfL. The bus, bus shelter and main route Toucan crossings have to be TfL of course.

We do have 20 mph zones at all school points but we had to push the council into instituting adequate ones, and they've spoilt some of them for cyclists by including the sharp edged "chocolate block" type of traffic calming platforms.

But really Hal, to say Ken has been neutral towards cycling simply doesn't stand examination and is grossly unfair. He is the one who has driven the cycle lane budget upwards against the GLC council opposition, it reaching £24 million in some years. He also instigated the free cycle route maps for London against opposition. He is the one who has driven the cycle parking facilities against opposition from many local councils, and it was he who started the full page advertising campaign to get cyclists treated better by other road users. He is the one who proposed cycle "motorways" and the Paris style cycle hire scheme, now both dead since he hasn't been elected.
.

if you know kens email address flecc,i think i will advise him that he should become mayor of blackburn.....i she he could improve things around here

 

[flecc]

if you know kens email address flecc,i think i will advise him that he should become mayor of blackburn.....i she he could improve things around here

If the Mayoral vote is anything to go by, almost half of us want to keep him and get him back into office in under four years time. In one sense we are lucky in that his replacement Boris is pro-cycling and a daily cyclist himself, but unfortunately he's "Mr Cutback", committed to economy and a drastic cutback of expenditure. There's a time and place when that's appropriate, but given the scale and range of London's metropolitan problems, here and now is not it, and we are likely just to revert to the "do nothing" agenda of the '80s and '90s since Ken was last in charge. That was the time of his hugely successful and popular "fares fair" policy, prompting Thatcher to shut down the GLC for succeeding where national government had always failed, prompted by nothing other than the most malicious of spite.

I'm not politically motivated and mainly vote conservative, but I've always supported Ken Livingstone despite his very left wing views because he is the only person who ever succeeds in improving London's immense transport problems through having the courage to enforce innovative solutions like the fair fares policies and the congestion charge.

After four years of Boris I think Ken will sail back in if he wants to stand again.
.

 

[HarryB]

It that case it's just traffic calming and daft as you say Hal. We have the same pinch point islands but always with pedestrian crossing incorporated. many of them are the long dog leg safety type with railings so people can't just run straight across, they have to do a left and right in the middle



Absolutely not, the Croydon Cycling Campaign are always attacking the council over their negative attitudes and some of the daft traffic decisions they take. This is almost all TfL work, the Trams as a PPP initially but now taken over by TfL. The bus, bus shelter and main route Toucan crossings have to be TfL of course.

We do have 20 mph zones at all school points but we had to push the council into instituting adequate ones, and they've spoilt some of them for cyclists by including the sharp edged "chocolate block" type of traffic calming platforms.

But really Hal, to say Ken has been neutral towards cycling simply doesn't stand examination and is grossly unfair. He is the one who has driven the cycle lane budget upwards against the GLC council opposition, it reaching £24 million in some years. He also instigated the free cycle route maps for London against opposition. He is the one who has driven the cycle parking facilities against opposition from many local councils, and it was he who started the full page advertising campaign to get cyclists treated better by other road users. He is the one who proposed cycle "motorways" and the Paris style cycle hire scheme, now both dead since he hasn't been elected.
.

As I said I stand to be corrected but what I do not understand is the divide between the South and the North and (this is what lost him the election) the inner and outer boroughs. I do take into account the cycling facilities in Finsbury park, but they cost millions and are vastly under utilised. I may be wrong but for me they are the icing on the cake - please can we have some space to cycle first and most importantly safe junctions? All those I ask about cycling say they won't do it because the roads are too dangerous - they don't say it is because of a lack of parking facilities. (For a while I did cycle to the park at Finsbury but getting on packed tube after cycling was unbearable - I nearly collapsed with heat exhaustion).

I say neutral because from the beginning he failed to get his road planners on message (he controls the major roads which are TFL). Talking of messages, he was the one who suggested putting licence plates on bicycles! He had eight years I don't think cycling was anywhere near the top of his agenda (I think there is some confusion - being anti-car is not the same as being pro-cycling). As for the two proposals - yes great but they came too late. Shall we talk about the 9 corruption cases that have gone to the Police? You can tell I am not a great fan, maybe we should agree to disagree!

 

[HarryB]

I'm not politically motivated and mainly vote conservative, but I've always supported Ken Livingstone despite his very left wing views because he is the only person who ever succeeds in improving London's immense transport problems through having the courage to enforce innovative solutions like the fair fares policies and the congestion charge.

.

We should laugh about this as I have voted Labour exclusively all my life except when it comes to our Ken - maybe after 4 years of Boris I will change my mind!

 

[flecc]

The nine corruption cases that went to the police have largely turned out to be not corruption cases at all Hal, the police throwing them out, and the remaining one is pending, not tried. Politics the world over always has some corruption, ours now being widely known as little different, and in this environment Ken Livingstone is the cleanest imaginable. No-one else has gained so little personally from high office.

As you say, you dislike him and that seems to bias you as it does so many others who will him to fail.

On whether he is responsible for the improvements I've mentioned, the bald fact is this. Croydon Council have been around since the dinosaurs (some of them are related) and none of these things ever appeared. Everything has happened under the new GLC and Mayor, the only Croydon council and government contribution being the insistence on the disastrous PPP for the tram system. It failed of course as with the tube, the trams losing huge amounts, but then TfL took it over as they have with the tube reconstruction now.

And I'm betting most of the progress will halt now Ken isn't there to motivate it.
.

 

[HarryB]

There are a number of cases still pending a police enquiry but I think you are right that they are limited and the work of one man rather than Ken Livingstone himself.

As for bias, like most people they are based on my own experiences and as Ken was, in the majority, only elected for his transport policies for me, this is where he has failed. Even the bus subsidy has multiplied eleven times - are they really eleven times better, I don't think so. They are certainly not eleven times cheaper. Clearly I am not alone. Don't dismiss Boris just yet - even my champagne socialist friend has been impressed at some of his appointments.

 

[flecc]

I'll give Boris the credit for anything he achieves Hal, but at present the indications aren't promising, his pre-election targets already being ducked out of. He even sounded like Ken word for word in his last statement on knife crime!

Certainly the buses aren't eleven times better or correspondingly cheaper, but that's in the nature of all public transport and services, the return being poor and usually a loss maker. The railways are the same and the Channel Tunnel has long been an economic lost cause. Of course in Europe they recognise that fact and don't expect them to make money, just paying out whatever is necessary to have a good service. Since Thatcher in particular we have this silly political idea that everything has to pay it's way, and one only has to look at the mess those policies have made of the BBC to see how futile that is.
.

 

[oldosc]

my lawd, dont e lunnon folk ave a ard life, we don't ave such problems ere, there bein only four buses a day,an ur local shop closin,saves us avin to walk up the village fur the paper. if e cant aford a delivery,us unt know about all them orrible fings a appenen abroad(up lunnon way), as fur bein taxed, well on a pension of £100 a week, dont apply do it.

 

[HarryB]

my lawd, dont e lunnon folk ave a ard life, we don't ave such problems ere, there bein only four buses a day,an ur local shop closin,saves us avin to walk up the village fur the paper. if e cant aford a delivery,us unt know about all them orrible fings a appenen abroad(up lunnon way), as fur bein taxed, well on a pension of £100 a week, dont apply do it.

Are we being a bit Londoncentric - sorry! I would love to get out of London but not too sure about what job I would do and so stuck here.

 

[flecc]

my lawd, dont e lunnon folk ave a ard life, we don't ave such problems ere, there bein only four buses a day,an ur local shop closin,saves us avin to walk up the village fur the paper. if e cant aford a delivery,us unt know about all them orrible fings a appenen abroad(up lunnon way), as fur bein taxed, well on a pension of £100 a week, dont apply do it.

That's a busy village!

Last village I lived in never had a shop and one bus a week on Wednesday, in the morning outward bound 13 miles to the nearest town, then in the afternoon the return journey.

Anything forgotten had to be gone without for a week.
.

 

[Footie]

That's a busy village!

Last village I lived in never had a shop and one bus a week on Wednesday, in the morning outward bound 13 miles to the nearest town, then in the afternoon the return journey.

Anything forgotten had to be gone without for a week.
.

Sounds like a lot of villages here.
Unfortunately, most are now full of holiday homes - only occupied a few months of the year.
A dead village means the village shops, pub and post office close, so it turns into a ghost town.
But don't worry about the locals - they can't afford the houses anyway so you won't find any.
.

 

[flecc]

Sounds like a lot of villages here.
Unfortunately, most are now full of holiday homes - only occupied a few months of the year.
A dead village means the village shops, pub and post office close, so it turns into a ghost town.
But don't worry about the locals - they can't afford the houses anyway so you won't find any.
.

It as World War 2 which did that to the village I mentioned, but it was unspoilt with mostly locals at the time. It's certainly been ruined now, more a tourist destination than anything else.
.

 

[oldosc]

That's a busy village!

Last village I lived in never had a shop and one bus a week on Wednesday, in the morning outward bound 13 miles to the nearest town, then in the afternoon the return journey.

Anything forgotten had to be gone without for a week.
.

Bet you wish you had an Aguttu then...
Jokin aside, It's easy to denigrate those who live and work in London , but having been there,Iknow you have to run very fast to stand still. It was so in 1957, and more so now.
I hope the forum has gathered that even though I regard myself as a bit of a freebooter, I also regard myself as one of the lucky ones, to be fit(ish)at 70 have had a startling life (due to listening to my dad ((a bit))and the owner of an Agattu