LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Earl Aelfheah]

I mean, it doesn't seem that crazy that a cycling charity looking to develop a transport policy, might want to engage an award winning public policy expert.

[exdulwicher]

Simple solutions say calton using gilkes to exit onto Dulwich village thus simplifying the village junction,

It doesn't simplify things at all.

The more junctions you have along a road, the more impediments to traffic flow. A very simple analogy, it's like a drip of water trickling along a string - the more knots in the string, the more that drip is going to be held up.

There's a recognised paradox to describe it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I mean, it doesn't seem that crazy that a cycling

> charity looking to develop a transport policy,

> might want to engage an award winning public

> policy expert.

Might want to engage or retain....there is a big difference between the two and once you're on the payroll then you lose all claims of impartiality I am afraid.

Anyway, we've been round and round in circles on Rachel Aldred so there's little point dragging it out again as I can't stand another discussion on what awaiting peer review means.....;-)

[Earl Aelfheah]

She has over 25 peer reviewed papers. They're not 'awaiting peer review'. Almost every published academic in this area gets accused of 'bias' in this debate and it's nonsense.

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi Rockets,

>

> I am not sure you're right about this. According

> to TFL Quarter 4 of the 2018/19 financial year saw

> an increase in the average daily cycle-km in

> central London of 4 per cent with respect to the

> same quarter in 2017/18. Across the whole of

> London, 2018 saw the highest growth observed in

> cycling volume since monitoring began (in 2015),

> increasing almost 5 per cent from the previous

> year and exceeding for the first time on record an

> average daily volume of more than 4 million

> cycle-km.

>

> Also, Rachel Aldred is a Professor in Transport at

> the University of Westminster with over 25 peer

> reviewed papers.

I am right about this ;-) Over the course of the 10 years from 2008 growth was significant but it slowed from 2017 onwards and declined in 2019.

Even the document you linked to (which is the year preceding the report where a 3% drop in cycling was seen) it says:

Although the pace of change has notably slowed in recent years, the overall

trajectory of growing travel demand and a progressive shift towards active,

sustainable and efficient modes ? familiar over the last two decades ? is being

maintained.

And then goes on to note:

However, further findings suggest that the demographic profile of people using these new cycle routes is

not significantly different to that of the general population of people who cycle in

London, and hence further work is necessary to make cycling more representative

and accessible to a wider demographic group.

In other words saturation point was being achieved within the traditional white male middle-aged cyclist demographic and this was why growth had slowed/declined.

[Earl Aelfheah]

So increased every year since 2015 except a small dip during the lockdown. After which it increased again this in 2020?

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> She has over 25 peer reviewed papers. They're not

> 'awaiting peer review'. Almost every published

> academic in this area gets accused of 'bias' in

> this debate and it's nonsense.

...accusations of bias are very easy when you have have been an employee of the London Cycling Campaign - it kind of goes with the territory unfortunately...you lose all rights to claim impartiality and balance the moment you go on the payroll....and Rachel would have known that when she took the role.

It actually came up in a FOI request made to TFL as to whether Rachel Aldred had declared a conflict of interest when she was commissioned by TFL to do a study as she was in her role at the LCC at the time (2012 - 2018). TFL wasn't able to answer as it would have exceeded the ?450 limit set on hours spent on an FOI request to find it.

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So increased every year since 2015 except a small

> dip during the lockdown. After which it increased

> again this in 2020?

No, increased every year until 2017, then plateau' d, declined in 2019 and then up again in 2020 due to the pandemic (driven mainly by outer London cycling - i.e. people being at home and taking to their bikes for exercise).

[legalalien]

Or get the independent schools and some of the state schools to be less selective and reduce their catchment areas so we don?t have Dulwich children commuting to Croydon and vice versa? Perhaps a willingness to commit to active travel / public transport to school could be built into the selection criteria?

(Only slightly tongue in cheek).

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Wow Legal

>

> Your counter argument has actually been useful in

> highlighting the solution

>

> It's not street closures or LTNs

>

> It's simply to relocate schools away from the area

> thus dumping traffic on other boroughs and driving

> away the parents who moved here to be within the

> catchment area further reducing car usage and

> congestion

>

> Of course it's all tongue in cheek but an

> interesting alternative to LTNs

[Earl Aelfheah]

Peer reviewed research dismissed. Data showing a consistent upward trend in cycling with London from 2015 dismissed. It's pointless isn't it?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No, increased every year until 2017, then plateau'

> d, declined in 2019 and then up again in 2020 due

> to the pandemic (driven mainly by outer London

> cycling - i.e. people being at home and taking to

> their bikes for exercise).

It's actually increased every single year since surveys began in 2013 / 14.

there was a levelling off in 2017, but this was followed by record increase in 2018. The trend over time has been consistently up. TFL, in the report you've quoted as evidence apparently that cycling isn't growing in London, say:

"In central London, the average quarterly growth in cycled kilometres in 2018 with respect to 2017 was 6.2 per cent, also the highest recorded since surveys began in Q4 2013/14, but this should be seen in the context of just 0.1 per cent growth the previous year. The most recent data from January-March and April-June 2019 continue to show signs of sustained long-term growth."

In 2020 there was again record growth, with a 22% increase in outer London. Whichever way you cut it, it's impossible to seriously argue that cycling in London hasn't consistently trended upwards over many years and continues to do so.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I do get frustrated the Southwark haven't done better with collecting data on the impact of LTNs. But then I have to remind myself that even if they did - whatever it concluded would likely be dismissed by many if it didn't support their view. Whichever side of the debate.

[heartblock]

No .... she does not have 25 ?peer reviewed? papers. Yes I am going but cannot deal with inaccurate scientific academic reporting. There are articles and there are peer reviewed articles, I speak as a scientist with many international peer reviewed papers. Also I have never been paid or employed by the organisation paying for the research, unlike Rachel.

[first mate]

Heartblock, I would also ask you not to go, not yet. This debate needs informed, credible voices and specifically those with a strong grounding in reading and interpreting data.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Heartblock, I agree you shouldn't leave the forum. It's good to debate (as I am sure you'll agree as an academic) and no one is attacking you personally. Perhaps I'm mistaken about the peer reviewed journal articles. I defer to your expertise here, but her Google scholar page suggests publications in a number of academic journals and an H-index of 29. She is a Professor at Westminster University. So does on the face of it seem to be a reliable source. I am happy for you to explain why I'm mistaken and happy to concede if I am wrong.

https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=jycgGvsAAAAJ&hl=en

[heartblock]

Might..enjoying 2:0 at present :)

[Earl Aelfheah]

😃👏

[heartblock]

Happy to..she doesn?t have 25 peer reviewed papers on the subject of LTNs, in the same way I may have a paper about subject A or subject B or C. Therefore if I wanted to talk about A, I would only mention A.

Also if I was paid by a pharmaceutical company to prove that a drug worked, my research would be compromised. Rachel is not neutral and aspects of her research are based on modelling rather than actual data, it does need to be reviewed with that in mind.

I?m not dismissing the research, but as a reviewer I would critically review it on that basis.

[heartblock]

And yes 😆🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[Earl Aelfheah]

I didn?t say she had 25 peer reviewed papers on LTNs.

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > No, increased every year until 2017, then

> plateau'

> > d, declined in 2019 and then up again in 2020

> due

> > to the pandemic (driven mainly by outer London

> > cycling - i.e. people being at home and taking

> to

> > their bikes for exercise).

>

> It's actually increased every single year since

> surveys began in 2013 / 14.

>

> there was a levelling off in 2017, but this was

> followed by record increase in 2018. The trend

> over time has been consistently up. TFL, in the

> report you've quoted as evidence apparently that

> cycling isn't growing in London, say:

>

> "In central London, the average quarterly growth

> in cycled kilometres in 2018 with respect to 2017

> was 6.2 per cent, also the highest recorded since

> surveys began in Q4 2013/14, but this should be

> seen in the context of just 0.1 per cent growth

> the previous year. The most recent data from

> January-March and April-June 2019 continue to show

> signs of sustained long-term growth."

>

> In 2020 there was again record growth, with a 22%

> increase in outer London. Whichever way you cut

> it, it's impossible to seriously argue that

> cycling in London hasn't consistently trended

> upwards over many years and continues to do so.

Rahx3 - nope. It's not pointless it's basic data and information interpretation. Volume vs cycled kilometres - there's a difference. TFL were cutting the data differently to show a win. It's what organisations do when the data isn't showing what they want it to show......see Southwark council as reference! ;-)

I will just leave this here from TFL's Travel for London Report 13 that was published in 2020.

The 2019 calendar year saw a small year-on-year decline of 2.7 per cent in cycling volumes (mainly driven

by trends in outer London, and reflecting unusually poor weather during the

counting periods)

I think with this and Heartblock's superb return to the fold on peer review that they volleyed into the top corner Rahrahrah might be 2-0 down on the evening! ;-)

Rahx3 - that was said very much in the spirit of the evening's superb football result and my tongue firmly placed in my cheek - so please take it in the spirit in which it was intended!! ;-)

[heartblock]

I would say that everything she publishes is not the pinnacle of unbiased research and is quite often small studies or modelling (based on data collected or modelled by others). So it is not the standard for let?s say... vaccine efficacy. I do not dismiss it, but one has to be careful about offering it up as proof of traffic congestion or pollution reduction, or as many advocates put forward a modal shift towards an increase in uptake of active travel.

For me, that is besides the point, when actual data about pollution levels has not been measured accurately in a timely or scientific method. In the small pockets it has, it appears that the most polluted residential roads are not in LTNs and have been discounted as roads that can be sacrificed in terms of traffic volume for roads with a lower density of residents and a lower level of pollution historically.

[heartblock]

So..let?s all think about ways to reduce pollution, encourage cycling and walking and enjoy the footy ⚽️

[Earl Aelfheah]

I?ll drink to that Heartblock

[Earl Aelfheah]

welcome back