London Assembly cycling infrastructure investigation
London Assembly says:
Over recent years, TfL policy has increasingly focused on the construction of physical cycling infrastructure on London’s roads. A change in direction towards more segregated infrastructure followed our report in 2012 recommending this approach.
Our investigation will cover the full range of cycling infrastructure in London, with a particular focus on:
Cycle Superhighways: a form of cycle lane, designed to make cycling safer by helping keep cyclists away from general traffic, and offer direct and continuous cycling on major routes.
Quietways: a network of cycle routes that link key destinations, improving safety and convenience through small-scale interventions.
Mini-Hollands: TfL schemes to invest neighbourhood-level improvements in walking and cycling, involving a range of interventions in each area.
Cycle parking: provision of parking spaces on-street, at stations or in dedicated parking facilities.
It is important that TfL is able to establish the effectiveness of the infrastructure it installs on London’s roads. We are concerned that to date there has been no comprehensive study of the new infrastructure’s impact on cycling safety, modal share and other road users.
Questions to answer:
1. What progress on new cycling infrastructure has been made under Sadiq Khan, and what are his long-term plans?
2. Has TfL resolved the problems that delayed some cycling schemes under the previous Mayor?
3. Has segregation delivered the anticipated benefits on the Cycle Superhighways? How many cyclists are using these routes?
4. To what extent has segregation had negative consequences for other road users and, if necessary, how can this be mitigated?
5. Have Quietways delivered their anticipated benefits? How many cyclists are using them?
6. What are the differences in infrastructure between inner and outer London? How can TfL ensure infrastructure in different areas is sufficient and appropriate to the location?
7. How will TfL’s new ‘Strategic Cycling Analysis’ help determine where and how to invest in infrastructure?
8. How appropriate is the 400-metre target set in the draft Transport Strategy? Can we equate proximity with access?
9. Is TfL’s approach to public engagement working effectively to improve scheme designs and meet stakeholder needs?
10. Are Londoners sufficiently aware of the cycling infrastructure available to them, and how can awareness be increased?
11. How is TfL using infrastructure to attract a more diverse range of people to cycle in London?
12. Is there sufficient cycle parking in London, and is it in the right locations?
13. How are the lessons of the Mini-Hollands and other previous cycling schemes being applied elsewhere?
14. Should cycling infrastructure be oriented toward longer-distance commuting journeys, or more localised trips?