Active travel charity Sustrans has urged the government and local authorities to guarantee protected cycle lanes on all main road routes to schools.

The Bristol-based charity says that a renewed focus on active travel infrastructure should be an urgent priority for Liz Truss’ Conservative government, as it would help embed new habits in people across the UK who have been forced to change the way they travel due to the ongoing cost of living crisis.

Sustrans’ call for more and better cycling infrastructure, especially around schools, comes in the middle of Cycle to School Week, when families are encouraged to ditch the car and ride their bikes to and from school.

The primary aim of the annual themed week is to help foster crucial behavioural change among young people which will, it is hoped, inspire a preference for active travel that will continue into adulthood.
But for Cycle to School Week to be a success, Sustrans says, “long-term barriers” that have prevented people on bikes from feeling welcome and safe on the roads need to be removed.

According to a recent YouGov poll, just 14 percent of parents felt very confident teaching their child to cycle safely on public roads using the Highway Code. Meanwhile, 59 percent of those surveyed believe that safe cycle routes offer a key solution which would make parents feel more confident to allow their child to cycle to school.

“Engaging this generation of younger school pupils with cycling and teaching them the importance of travelling actively, will only have lasting impact if we all strive to make sure children and families feel safe and welcome on the road,” says Sustrans’ Chief Executive Xavier Bruce.

“That’s why this Cycle to School Week, Sustrans calls on Local Authority leaders and the Government to show real ambition and commit to installing protected cycle lanes along main road routes to schools.”

Sustrans’ 2021 Walking and Cycling Index (link is external), which surveyed roughly 26,000 people, also found that 65 percent of respondents want cycle tracks that are physically protected from traffic, while 58 percent of people on low incomes would welcome more government spending on walking and wheeling initiatives.

Brice pointed out that prioritising active travel could address some of the UK’s most pressing concerns at the moment, including health problems, air pollution, and by “freeing people from the expensive and restrictive lifestyles of car overuse”.

“Parents know cycling is a great way to get about cheaply and healthily, and to connect with other people in their community, which cars simply cannot achieve,” Brice added. “Now more than ever, we must make it easier and more attractive for people everywhere to walk, wheel and cycle.

“With new leadership from Prime Minister Truss, there is fresh opportunity to renew our transport priorities for what the UK people need. It is vital active travel is embedded into in our transport system and that roads are safer for all.”

https://road.cc/content/news/sustrans-calls-protected-bike-lanes-school-routes-296401

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>
> “That’s why this Cycle to School Week, Sustrans calls on Local Authority
> leaders and the Government to show real ambition and commit to installing
> protected cycle lanes along main road routes to schools.”
>
> Sustrans’ 2021 Walking and Cycling Index (link is external), which
> surveyed roughly 26,000 people, also found that 65 percent of respondents
> want cycle tracks that are physically protected from traffic, while 58
> percent of people on low incomes would welcome more government spending on

You were whining recently about measures put in place which isolated cycle
tracks from the main carriageway.

found that 65 percent of respondents want cycle tracks that are physically protected from traffic . . .

Bikes are TRAFFIC argh!

Hopefully this isn't just short-sighted - car drivers park anywhere, so protected bike lanes around schools will be perfect for drop-off, in addition to using the pavements etc!

Also, as with everybody else, child cyclists need to feel & be safe away from a few cycle tracks - only driver behaviour according to HC will help that. Likewise, motorways aren't the only roads that motor vehicles use!

Brian <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
> swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

>> “That’s why this Cycle to School Week, Sustrans calls on Local Authority
>> leaders and the Government to show real ambition and commit to installing
>> protected cycle lanes along main road routes to schools.”

>> Sustrans’ 2021 Walking and Cycling Index (link is external), which
>> surveyed roughly 26,000 people, also found that 65 percent of respondents
>> want cycle tracks that are physically protected from traffic, while 58
>> percent of people on low incomes would welcome more government spending on

> You were whining recently about measures put in place which isolated cycle
> tracks from the main carriageway.

You might have a little difficulty finding any form of logical coherence in
those postings, one example being a solicitor who gets a cyclist off a
charge is portrayed as a hero, while one who gets a driver off is
denigrated as a Mr Arsehole. Such is the way of these things. Having his
cake and eating it with cycle lanes is just another example.

Greater Manchester’s cycle hire scheme was put forward as a shining example
of a way forward, but 30 seconds spent looking at the figures showed that
each 1.6 mile bicycle journey cost £436 of taxpayers money; it would have
been cheaper to have rented a fleet of stretch limousines.

--
Spike

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> found that 65 percent of respondents want cycle tracks that are
> physically protected from traffic . . .
>
> Bikes are TRAFFIC argh!
>
> Hopefully this isn't just short-sighted - car drivers park anywhere, so
> protected bike lanes around schools will be perfect for drop-off, in
> addition to using the pavements etc!
>
> Also, as with everybody else, child cyclists need to feel & be safe away
> from a few cycle tracks - only driver behaviour according to HC will help
> that. Likewise, motorways aren't the only roads that motor vehicles use!
>
>

It is clear that many cyclists, including you, are fair from familiar with
the Highway Code. In particular as it relates to where they should position
themselves on the road.

I understand from reading an unpublished Tory policy document (I can't tell you how I got my hands on it) that Zil Lanes are to be introduced in London to ensure bankers and hedgefund managers can get from work to the wine bar without delay.

Parking restrictions for cars costing more than £100K are also to be removed.

Brian <noinv@lid.org> wrote:
> swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
>> found that 65 percent of respondents want cycle tracks that are
>> physically protected from traffic . . .
>>
>> Bikes are TRAFFIC argh!
>>
>> Hopefully this isn't just short-sighted - car drivers park anywhere, so
>> protected bike lanes around schools will be perfect for drop-off, in
>> addition to using the pavements etc!
>>
>> Also, as with everybody else, child cyclists need to feel & be safe away
>> from a few cycle tracks - only driver behaviour according to HC will help
>> that. Likewise, motorways aren't the only roads that motor vehicles use!
>>
>>
>
> It is clear that many cyclists, including you, are fair from familiar with
> the Highway Code. In particular as it relates to where they should position
> themselves on the road.

Quite. Cyclists know, and demand, their ‘rights’ but are woefully short
when it comes to discharging their responsibilities. One only has to look
at that recent case of the bolshie biker who lectured a police officer, but
his video showed he was the only one in step; no other cyclist in the video
did what he did by riding unnecessarily in the centre of the lane, instead
of the primary (default) position of keeping well to the left.

Rule 160, aimed at all riders and drivers rather than cyclists in
particular: "Once moving you should keep to the left, unless road signs or
markings indicate otherwise. The exceptions are when you want to overtake,
turn right or pass parked vehicles or pedestrians in the road”.

Well, that’s clear enough, at least to non-cyclists.

--
Spike

ktache | 5153 posts | 17 hours ago
1 like

I think we need more barriers.

Between the heavy vehicles and the vulnerable.

----------------
SPOT ON.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> ktache | 5153 posts | 17 hours ago
> 1 like
>
> I think we need more barriers.
>
> Between the heavy vehicles and the vulnerable.
>
>
> ----------------
> SPOT ON.

What’s the point?

As we have seen from postings made on the subject, the self-entitled
cyclist demands to be able to pull out from the cycle lane any time the
mood strikes, irrespective of any user of the motor vehicle lane.

Barriers would prevent that.

This is just another example of the over-active ego of the cyclist,
demanding the fabulous and expecting the taxpayer to fund it without
question.

--
Spike

"Brice pointed out that prioritising active travel could address some of the UK’s most pressing concerns at the moment"
Unfortunately Liz has quickly proved she is no more capable of seeing the big picture than any of her predecessors.
However I'd loved to be proved wrong.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Brice pointed out that prioritising active travel could address some of
> the UK’s most pressing concerns at the moment"
> Unfortunately Liz has quickly proved she is no more capable of seeing the
> big picture than any of her predecessors.
> However I'd loved to be proved wrong.
>

“The Big Picture” is that bicycles, electric vehicles, solar panels, and
windmills are going to do nothing for the planet except make things worse.
Plenty of people are making big bucks from it, though. Just look at what
the windmill owners are being paid for their ‘cheap energy’.

--
Spike

QUOTE:“Parents know cycling is a great way to get about cheaply and healthily, and to connect with other people in their community, which cars simply cannot achieve,” Brice added.ENDS

Especially with the vast rollout of the extended ULEZ in London.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE:“Parents know cycling is a great way to get about cheaply and
> healthily, and to connect with other people in their community, which
> cars simply cannot achieve,” Brice added.ENDS
>
> Especially with the vast rollout of the extended ULEZ in London.
>

65% of those in London oppose the extension of the ULEZ.

Close to 40 per cent of London’s car owners could switch to an electric vehicle (EV) in the coming year if plans to expand the city’s Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) are implemented, a new study has found.

Data collected by EV experts Move Electric found that 39.8 per cent of Londoners would be likely to make the change if the plans to roll out the ULEZ across most of Greater London were put in place.

The outfit surveyed 384 residents in the capital and found that 41.9 per cent of respondents supported the Mayor of London’s plans to expand the ULEZ boundary, set to commence in August 2023.

The expansion would see the emissions-based charging zone grow to almost 600 square miles, from the current 147 square mile zone.A public consultation was launched last year, with the new zone set to encompass most areas inside the M25 to tackle urban air quality.

The research also found expanding ULEZ could prompt 38.5 per cent of car owners in Greater London to sell their vehicle – regardless of whether it meets emissions standards.

Of drivers whose cars were not compliant, a whopping 79.3 per cent stated the zone expansion could lead them to get rid of their current vehicle. Meanwhile, just 20.2 per cent of owners with compliant cars said would consider selling their vehicle if the zone were expanded.

James Attwood, Move Electric editor, said: “The intent of ULEZ to deter drivers from using old, polluting vehicles and to decrease air pollution in the capital is clearly working as our research shows 39.8 per cent of car owners in Greater London could make the switch to electric if the zone was to expand further next year.

“Alongside expanding the ULEZ, it is important London’s boroughs, and the whole of the UK, is ready to meet widespread EV adoption, with sufficient electric vehicle public charging infrastructure, as well as ensuring more investment is made towards greener transport methods such as cycleways and electric buses.”
The current Ultra Low Emissions Zone operates 24 hours a day and sees drivers face a daily charge of £12.50 if their vehicle does not meet emissions standards.

Overall, drivers could end up paying more than £4,500 per year for non-compliant vehicles operating in the zone every day.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> QUOTE:“Parents know cycling is a great way to get about cheaply and
> healthily, and to connect with other people in their community, which
> cars simply cannot achieve,” Brice added.ENDS
>
> Especially with the vast rollout of the extended ULEZ in London.
What cobblers. Having or not having a car (or anything else) has no bearing
whatsoever on connectivity with one’s community.

As far as London goes, the ULEZ is just another reason among many not to go
there.

--
Spike

A proposed new fleet of Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ)-compliant Havering Council buses is raising concerns as costs upwards of £500,000 are predicted.

The potential purchase of the 27 welfare buses is yet to be agreed by cabinet, with a decision on whether procurement will move ahead expected by October 5.

The Mayor of London's proposal to extend the ULEZ to include the whole of Greater London has come under scrutiny in Havering, with the council recently passing a motion stating it opposes the introduction of the zone.

The Mayor’s Office however says the ULEZ extension is a necessity in its attempts to clean up London’s air.
Mayor of London Sadiq Khan delivers a keynote speech at Forest Hill school in south London

A spokesperson said: “Air pollution is a matter of life and death. Around 4,000 Londoners die every year as a direct result of toxic air, and the majority of these deaths are in outer London.

“Four million Londoners are now breathing cleaner air thanks to the expansion of the ULEZ last autumn. An estimated five million more Londoners living in outer London are expected to benefit if the ULEZ is expanded London-wide.”
Recommended by

But Cllr David Taylor questioned whether the council should be paying additional costs to purchase new compliant vehicles.

He said: “Vital services, such as these, are funded by taxpayers and the money is already tight. Our taxes are better spent on helping those in need, not filling TfL (Transport for London) coffers.

According to TfL’s website, exemptions are available for vehicles including London-licensed taxis and minibuses for community transport.

Asked specifically about exemptions, the Mayor’s Office spokesperson said: “In order to maximise the air quality and health benefits of ULEZ, there are limited discounts and exemptions available. However, there will be a grace period for minibuses operated by not-for-profit organisations.”

A Havering Council spokesperson said that while the proposal remains undecided, it is keen to have a fleet of vehicles which uses cleaner fuel to help reduce its carbon footprint.

The spokesperson did not clarify whether the new vehicles would qualify for exemptions, though added: “The buses would be fully wheelchair accessible and designed for carrying vulnerable children and adults with special educational needs to school or specialist day care centres.

“This will of course meet the current and planned LEZ and ULEZ emission standards for London.”

EV experts surveyed a whole 384 people out of the 12 million or so in
London and came up with the unsurprising result that lots of people ‘could’
(note weasel word) buy an EV if they were coerced into it.

MRDA…🙄

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> Data collected by EV experts Move Electric found that 39.8 per cent of
> Londoners would be likely to make the change if the plans to roll out the
> ULEZ across most of Greater London were put in place.

> The outfit surveyed 384 residents in the capital and found that 41.9 per
> cent of respondents supported the Mayor of London’s plans to expand the
> ULEZ boundary, set to commence in August 2023.

--
Spike

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> A spokesperson said: “Air pollution is a matter of life and death. Around
> 4,000 Londoners die every year as a direct result of toxic air, and the
> majority of these deaths are in outer London.

THAT’S BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE LIVE IN OUTER LONDON!

Honestly, who wrote this tripe?

🙄

--
Spike

Toxic air pollution is the biggest environmental risk to Londoners' health, and traffic emissions are the biggest source of toxic air in London.

Toxic air pollution increases your risk of heart and lung disease, worsens chronic illnesses such as asthma, and puts children's health at risk. It's not just a central London problem. Many areas across the city are exceeding the legal limits for pollution.
How the ULEZ helps air pollution

The aim of the expanded ULEZ is to help reduce harmful nitrogen dioxide by around 30% across London.

Many of those who travel in the expanded ULEZ have already taken action to clean up their vehicles and help clean up London's air. More than 80% of vehicles are now compliant, which is up from 39% in February 2017 when plans for the larger area were first announced.

See what else we're doing to improve the environment in London.
Where the money goes

We don't make a profit and we are committed to reducing our costs. Any money received from the ULEZ will be reinvested into improving the transport network, including cycleways, buses and Tube, and helping to improve London's air quality.
Check if your vehicle meets the standards

Use our vehicle checker to find out if your vehicle meets the emissions standard and the charges you need to pay.
Check your vehicle
Alternative transport options

To help clean up London's air, we are encouraging all Londoners to walk, cycle or use public transport.
Cycling and walking

People who walk or cycle 20 minutes a day as part of their regular journeys feel improved mental and physical wellbeing. Look out for the temporary cycle lanes and wider pavements so you can walk or cycle more safely.

To encourage cycling, we:

Fund free, online and tailored cycle skills courses, whether you're a first-time rider or a regular cyclist
Have made it easier to park your bike across London with over 150,000 on-street cycle parking spaces across London and 20,000 spaces at stations
Have bikes for hire with TfL Santander Cycles which costs from just £2 a day, with all 30-minute journeys included. If you ride for longer than 30 minutes, you pay £2 for every additional 30 minutes

Public transport

Travel off-peak anywhere between Zones 2 and 6 for £1.60, and use our Hopper fare to take unlimited bus or tram journeys within one hour for £1.65. This includes our night buses.

Download the TfL Go app on the Apple Store or Google Play for live travel updates and to find quiet times to travel. We regularly clean our services using hospital grade antiviral disinfectant.

Every bus you catch meets the highest emissions standards.
Taxis and private hire vehicles

We've also been working to create cleaner taxis and cleaner private hire vehicles.
Car clubs

Car Clubs are short-term car rental services. They give members access to locally parked cars, through paying by the minute, hour or day.

Many car clubs now operate electric or hybrid vehicles, which can help reduce emissions and improve air quality. Find out more about car clubs and the companies that provide them.

Considering going electric? See a list of eligible vehicles for a government grant on gov.uk.

Spike <Aero.Spike@mail.invalid> wrote:
> swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

>> QUOTE:“Parents know cycling is a great way to get about cheaply and
>> healthily, and to connect with other people in their community, which
>> cars simply cannot achieve,” Brice added.ENDS

>> Especially with the vast rollout of the extended ULEZ in London.
>
> What cobblers. Having or not having a car (or anything else) has no bearing
> whatsoever on connectivity with one’s community.

> As far as London goes, the ULEZ is just another reason among many not to go
> there.

[The Bishopsgate] stabbing by youths on cycles is the latest incident in a
scourge of knife crime and stabbings across London and more widely in the
UK. 11,829 knife-related offences have been recorded in the last 12 months
in the capital alone, without including figures from the City of London.
This is up 10 per cent on the equivalent figure for the previous 12 months.

--
Spike

What is London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ)?

The Ultra Low Emission Zone is a government initiative introduced in 2019 to reduce emissions and harmful pollutants in the capital. To improve air quality, the initiative charges those with heavily polluting vehicles to travel into and with London.

When it first launched in 2019, the ULEZ covered the same area as the congestion charge zone. It expanded out in 2021 to its current size, covering everywhere inside (but not including) the North Circular and South Circular roads.

The ULEZ is expanding in 2023 to cover the entire area currently covered by the LEZ, which includes all of Greater London. This covers most of the area inside the M25 orbital motorway.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> What is London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ)?

> The Ultra Low Emission Zone is a government initiative introduced in 2019
> to reduce emissions and harmful pollutants in the capital. To improve air
> quality, the initiative charges those with heavily polluting vehicles to
> travel into and with London.

OK. Stop right there.

If the stated aim was to improve air quality, then the ‘heavily polluting
vehicles’ would have been banned.

Instead, they are *taxed*!

So the aim of the measure isn’t to improve air quality, except as a distant
aim, it is to raise money.

When the income stream from the ‘heavily polluting vehicles’ begins to dry
up, try guessing what might be the next step to keeping the revenue stream
going.

> When it first launched in 2019, the ULEZ covered the same area as the
> congestion charge zone. It expanded out in 2021 to its current size,
> covering everywhere inside (but not including) the North Circular and South Circular roads.

Oh!

Can anyone see the Congestion Charge Zone being expanded right to the outer
limits?

And charges being increased by RPI+20%?

> The ULEZ is expanding in 2023 to cover the entire area currently covered
> by the LEZ, which includes all of Greater London. This covers most of the
> area inside the M25 orbital motorway.

Well, well, who’d a thunk it?

Keep those tax dollars rolling in!

🙄

--
Spike

But the Mayor, in an interview with the Standard, said the consultation was “not a numbers game” and added that it was vital to further reduce the threat to public health from toxic air.

“The idea of parking things or kicking the can down the road is not an option,” he said. “The easy option is to dither and delay. I think it is important to take action.”

Mr Khan said he believed the consultation, which closed at the end of July, had been “hijacked” by opponents, including people living outside London.

He is yet to receive a report on the consultation results from Transport for London — it is due by next month. The Mayor will then decide whether to press ahead with plans to expand the £12.50-a-day Ulez across all 33 boroughs on August 29 next year.

He indicated the scheme’s widening, dubbed the GL-Ulez, could be modified if he received responses raising “substantive” issues but insisted a “crude majority” opposing its expansion would not automatically lead to the proposals being ditched.

“The decision to expand the Ulez to all of London isn’t predetermined,” he said.

“I have not made up my mind. What I’m clear about is: it is not a numbers game. This is not a referendum. If there is a crude majority of people for it, that doesn’t take me over the line, or a crude number of people against it.

“This is not a referendum [like] Brexit. It’s not about saying if there is a percentage against I won’t do it or a percentage in favour I will do it.”

On 07/10/2022 01:54 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> But the Mayor, in an interview with the Standard, said the consultation was “not a numbers game” and added that it was vital to further reduce the threat to public health from toxic air.
>
> “The idea of parking things or kicking the can down the road is not an option,” he said. “The easy option is to dither and delay. I think it is important to take action.”
>
> Mr Khan said he believed the consultation, which closed at the end of July, had been “hijacked” by opponents, including people living outside London.
>
> He is yet to receive a report on the consultation results from Transport for London — it is due by next month. The Mayor will then decide whether to press ahead with plans to expand the £12.50-a-day Ulez across all 33 boroughs on August 29 next year.
>
> He indicated the scheme’s widening, dubbed the GL-Ulez, could be modified if he received responses raising “substantive” issues but insisted a “crude majority” opposing its expansion would not automatically lead to the proposals being ditched.
>
> “The decision to expand the Ulez to all of London isn’t predetermined,” he said.
>
> “I have not made up my mind. What I’m clear about is: it is not a numbers game. This is not a referendum. If there is a crude majority of people for it, that doesn’t take me over the line, or a crude number of people against it.
>
> “This is not a referendum [like] Brexit. It’s not about saying if there is a percentage against I won’t do it or a percentage in favour I will do it.”

So why bother "consulting", Genghis?

Everyone knows that your consultations (so-called) are an undemocratic sham.

JNugent <jenningsandco@mail.com> wrote:
> On 07/10/2022 01:54 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> But the Mayor, in an interview with the Standard, said the consultation
>> was “not a numbers game” and added that it was vital to further reduce
>> the threat to public health from toxic air.
>>
>> “The idea of parking things or kicking the can down the road is not an
>> option,” he said. “The easy option is to dither and delay. I think it is
>> important to take action.”
>>
>> Mr Khan said he believed the consultation, which closed at the end of
>> July, had been “hijacked” by opponents, including people living outside London.
>>
>> He is yet to receive a report on the consultation results from Transport
>> for London — it is due by next month. The Mayor will then decide whether
>> to press ahead with plans to expand the £12.50-a-day Ulez across all 33
>> boroughs on August 29 next year.
>>
>> He indicated the scheme’s widening, dubbed the GL-Ulez, could be
>> modified if he received responses raising “substantive” issues but
>> insisted a “crude majority” opposing its expansion would not
>> automatically lead to the proposals being ditched.
>>
>> “The decision to expand the Ulez to all of London isn’t predetermined,” he said.
>>
>> “I have not made up my mind. What I’m clear about is: it is not a
>> numbers game. This is not a referendum. If there is a crude majority of
>> people for it, that doesn’t take me over the line, or a crude number of people against it.
>>
>> “This is not a referendum [like] Brexit. It’s not about saying if there
>> is a percentage against I won’t do it or a percentage in favour I will do it.”
>
> So why bother "consulting", Genghis?
>
> Everyone knows that your consultations (so-called) are an undemocratic sham.
>

I like the way he described majorities that are in favour of something he
doesn’t like as ‘crude’.

Gives it away…

Can’t he find a Met Police Commissioner to undermine?

--
Spike