Labour's plans for rail nationalisation and bus franchising may at best slow accelerating pace of decline.

Radical changes to the way road space allocated and charged for, along with radical innovation to the way services run (e.g. metroisation) needed for modal shift in the right direction.

Though TfL making Oxford Street a red route questions even that logic.

Not keen on that, as Ox St for shopping & ambling than moving on foot. But yes surely TfL targets for modal shift & less driving require fundamental rethink of the what, why & where of TfL roads (i.e red routes).

Careful what you say now, or Living Streets will be next in line to be called out as blockers...

(of homes that is, they don't seem to care about pavement obstructions!)

How could it be pragmatic if there is *zero* consideration of current or future cycling flows, contrary to guidance they claim to follow?

We've seen this type of failure on many other key cycle routes. There isn't the funding now to keep making the same mistakes then having to dig up and rebuild.

As explained it's *not* the "minimum", especially for busy routes. Compare the image promoted by @westminster-lcc.bsky.social with the narrower reality.

Either filter George Street or make 1-way for cars like popular Tavistock Place: imagine how unpleasant that would be if 1.5m tracks on each side.

As for taking decision weeks before Ox St plans (likely to require major changes to adjacent roads), that is clear breach of statutory duties, e.g. Network Management Duty, Best Value Duty etc.

Perverse that City of Westminster only considered increase in driving, but no increase in cycling!

No they have either lied and/or are incompetent:
- misapplied minimum width at constraint (e.g. tree) to significant section of George St route
- ignored reduction in effective width due to kerbs
- no cycling flow data, allowance for background growth, let alone diversion from pedestrianisation

Not just usual guff, this is wrong scheme at wrong time.

A blocker not just to cycling growth but also a wider vision of car lite West End.

bsky.app/profile/rafe...

Absolutely bonkers to proceed with this, weeks before wider traffic changes needed for Oxford Street pedestrianisation are published.

This scheme doesn't comply with DfT minimum width standards for any cycle route. Let alone provide adequate capacity to grow cycling on key east-west corridor.

Also worth remembering the UK's concept of "Generalised Journey Time". This includes train frequency, so supporting your argument. www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

Still wonder though if an unexpected consequence of "delay repay" is timetable padding to reduce risk of payments.

It is very hard to see how the UK government can sign this statement, which makes it absolutely clear that it recognises that Israel is committing - as a matter of state policy - deliberate and systematic war crimes, without at a minimum cutting all military cooperation with Israel.

Schedule 8 on key route networks.

Can't remember ever seeing a bill where so much of the key content is buried at the back.

If this embedded enshittification has become the new normal, it does beg the question how policy, campaigning, influencing etc. all need to evolve.

It's a random mix of schemes that were already in construction/completed, those that were paused and some that we thought had hit the buffers, like this one in Shrewsbury:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

Or indeed the commitment in DfT's 2021 Transport Decarbonisation Plan to make carbon outcomes a "fundamental" requirement.

Still waiting for that guidance though...