Property developer deploys "security patrols" to stop cyclists riding across 'no cycling' bridge at new £3bn London neighbourhood… that is designed to "enable sustainable transport and reduce car use"

The funny thing is that tons of adults are walking with nothing better to do too😅

I've never seen road.cc try and gatekeep cycling, quite the opposite actually

Cynicism is tempting - so often it seems you can see "green" as having the other meaning meaning of "naive".

Green housing?  Still put up by folks driving fossil-fuel powered vehicles.  Still made largely of steels, bricks, cement and now plastics (not known for being low embodied energy or zero-emissions in creation).  Still forms a largely impermiable cover over previously green (or maybe brown field) spaces.  Still inhabited by more humans using ever more resources and producing tons of waste.

But ... there's some wood on the outside, or the insulation's a bit better, or we've planted some trees.

Or perhaps the colour "green" also indicates "something invisible" (or at least "not black and sooty")?  As in "zero emissions", which seems to mean "emit elsewhere - somewhere out of mind".

Of course some harm minimization is taking place - that is remarkable.  And it's frankly impossible to imagine humans suddenly dropping the anchors on our increasing resource usage, never mind reversing that.  And in theory this all could lead somewhere which both retains some of the modern good stuff but is far more efficient and can be made to last for longer.

However Jevons Paradox often seems to apply to human affairs.

The core issue might be that even though the number of vegans/vegetarians, cyclists, green energy and EVs is rising, on the other hand meat consumption, ICE's cars and traffic are also on the rise (EVs may already have peaked in Europe in 2024 btw).

At this point 95% of animals on Earth are now cattle, chickens, sheep, etc (not counting insects or fish in the oceans of course, only land vertebrates)... 75% of wildlife populations has disappeared in 50 years (while human population has more than doubled). These are WWF numbers, I can't check them, but almost nobody realizes at what point the environment is being modified - and the trend is not changing!

So I wouldn't say "cynicism is tempting", but cynicism is the rule, 90% of these "efforts" are pure marketing, and 9% naivete...

... six of the nine planetary boundaries significantly exceeded, seven tipping elements within uncertainty bounds...

It's difficult to imaging that this is all going to end well.

levestane wrote:

... six of the nine planetary boundaries significantly exceeded, seven tipping elements within uncertainty bounds... and Trump re-elected as president.

It's difficult to imaging that this is all going to end well.

Fixed it.

brooksby wrote:

levestane wrote:

... six of the nine planetary boundaries significantly exceeded, seven tipping elements within uncertainty bounds... and Trump re-elected as president likely with the Republican party in control of both House and Senate.

It's difficult to imaging that this is all going to end well.

Fixed it.

Further fixing - or possibly breaking...

brooksby]</p>

<p>[quote=levestane wrote:

... six of the nine planetary boundaries significantly exceeded, seven tipping elements within uncertainty bounds... and Trump re-elected as president. 

Boris is dry-cleaning his PM suit.

Fixed it even further.

Do you think he knows what this looks like in the UK? Good hi vis though.

And, judging from the picture, there's perfectly passable routes around the sides of the water, which I would choose over a no doubt slippery, undulating and congested boardwalk anyway. 

Agree 100% - and more so because most of the uber / deliveroo riders are actually motorists on illegal vehicles not cyclists.

The majority of the "proposed measures" will be not providing parking spaces for residents. Whilst that's likely to disincentivise driving, I don't think that the developer deserves any credit for it.

Also reflective of the fact that on some of the larger developments more than 2,000 separate documents have to be produced and submitted before construction can commence. 

And planning applications can sit for years without being approved by Councils - often requiring planning inspectorate intervention. So that years of project financing costs for the land in the interim.

These huge costs are on top of other levies already charged to developers.

In my experience, delays to the planning process are usually down to the developers failing to do what they have been told time and time again they need to do. They appoint consultants that under-cut their competitors, but aren't up to the job, and then blame the council as they charge much more in the long run than their competent and ethical competitors would have done.

And yes, lots of reports are required to ensure that buildings won't fall down, won't be dangerous to those who will be using them, that piling foundations won't result in pollution of the water environment, that they've allowed enough space for bins, and that is's possible for those bins to be emptied without a bin lorry having to reverse up a narrow lane with poor visibility and children playing. That there's adequate drainage so you don't contribute towards flooding, and capacity in the sewage system so that people can flush their toilets without it backing up. 

If you are a developer/consultant that isn't able to produce what's required, either you are not up to the job or your proposed development isn't suited to that location (and if you/your advisors were up to the job,  you'd have worked that out at the start of the process).