Life during lockdown

Like others who have commented, I think aims sound worthy but ultimately meaningless. Typical consultant-speak. We need specific measurable targets ASAP.

Delivering cleaner greener London should be the overarching aim. Offer grants for residents who want to go green (cars, energy, etc). Councils and government bodies must lead by example: green vehicles, plastic-free schools, care homes and other community buildings, retrofit social housing,etc.

Put people and their well-being at the heart of all policies, rather than economic growth that only benefits the few and exploits the many. Good to see doughnut economics getting a few mentions here.

Keep all people safe, not just the young. We need more police.

London must reinvent itself, creating a new normal. Don't strive to return to how things were - evolve. Big businesses will have realised that expensive central London office space for all employees is unnecessary in the digital age. Look at options to convert offices into affordable housing. 

Planning needs a total rethink. Stop building on green space, including back gardens. All developments should have minimum 30% tree cover. Existing mature trees must be protected. Access to green space should comply with Natural England standards (ANGSt). High rise blocks are not the solution to the housing crisis - seek to reduce population density.

Let's keep the local community-based systems that sprang up as a result of lockdown. Local communities that are part of a London-wide network.

Central London should be a buzzing cultural centre with plenty of public realm for residents and visitors to enjoy.

Create a citizens' assembly so that Londoners are invested in their own future.

Have any of these people insisting that cycling is the magic solution to all the problems had children, or elderly/disabled family or friends, or dogs?     Presumably their groceries are delivered, but that isn't the majority preference yet and shopping is bulky and heavy.   I'm in my seventies and certainly couldn't cycle. or battle my way through pedestrians staring at their hands on pavements, and I don't relish the thought of spending a huge amount of time in a queue in all weathers waiting for public transport which is often cancelled, or overcrowded, and costs a fortune (I'm just waiting for them to cancel or severely restrict the travel passes for older citizens).    We can't all afford Ubers.  Then there's the safety element.    Having been beaten to a pulp by a deranged person one afternoon in winter (i.e. it was dark) when I was 15 and walking home I prefer the safety which driving my car provides. and am more than happy to provide chauffeuring services to friends when required.  

Next year, thanks to the extension of the ULEZ area,  I am expected to "find" about £10,000 to exchange my perfectly servicable vehicle for one which complies with new regulations.   No doubt these regulations will be altered within a couple of years and we will be expected to "find" more money to replace vehicles.     Meanwhile, little is said about the downsides of electric vehicles - namely the effects of manufacture and subsequent disposal of the batteries - let alone the production of energy required to supply the re-charging stations, or how many of them will be available.  

There are 8million people living within the M25.    How many of them can manage without a vehicle?   Has any research been done to clarify?     It's almost as if the goal is to empty London of anyone who can't afford to live here.

End homelessness - the recovery from coronavirus should focus on the most vulnerable. There's possibly just a few weeks left until hotels start opening up and homeless people may end up back on the streets. It's possible to end homelessness and the Mayor of London should make sure that proper accommodation is found as soon as possible.

OBJECTIVES OK (Older people missing). URGENT. Rush to get people back to work in central London, without public transport, is a strong message to people to use their car, and keep using their car. 'It is safer!'. It will put back plans to greening travel in London by many years. There must be enforcement of congestion and parking restrictions. Serious, robust plans MUST be put in place to gradually increase return to use of trains and buses. Bikes and walking expansion is great and necessary, but is not going to happen for longer journeys, for most people. Obviously, consistent with scientific advice, an information campaign needs to be planned AND STARTED to increase public security in the safety of travelling on public transport. We are now Level 3. Large areas of life will be soon be open. This could lead to big increases in vehicle traffic + noise and air pollution.in all parts of the City. A failure to grow the use of central London retail and leisure facilities; with the consequent loss of income to businesses and the public purse will increase unemployment, especially to young people and prevent spending on other priorities.

I am worried about the central London (Oxford Street, Regent Street, etc) economy. At the moment it is cut off from the rest of London. This is because we are currently discouraged from using public transport, it is too far away for most people outside zone 1 to walk or cycle to, and the massive increase in the scope of the Congestion Charge will add to business costs during the week and deter shoppers by car at the weekend. 

Working from home had already started before the pandemic and it is likely that this will increase. Even if this is only part time, the number of days worked in central London are likely to significantly decrease. 

For those of us in Zone 2 and beyond, there are lots of alternative shopping centres (Westfield, Brent Cross, Kingston, etc) that offer competitive shopping opportunities and are much more convenient and accessible.

In the Agreed Aims, the word young is specifically mentioned. Older is not. This is unbalanced. Does not care for older Londoners have as great a claim on City Hall's attentions as younger ones?

It is really important to monitor London's air now and in the future. There is much to be concerned about from emissions of diesel and also that of tyre and braking impacts. The latter apply also to electric vehicles and the quantity of these on the roads is set to increase.These all release particulate matter (PM) which the World Health Organisation believe that there are no safe limits. PM emissions cause cardio respiratory disease and really the best way to lessen their impacts is to reduce private vehicles, increase public transport and set up lots of PM monitoring stations both in town and in the suburbs too.

going forward we need to help not hinder Londoners.

encourage the use of 2 wheel transport at all opportunity, both pushbikes and motorbikes.

If you get 10% of car drivers onto PTW (powered 2 wheels- mopeds/motorbikes) congestion would drop 40%, allowing for road changes that will benefit all but especially pedestrians and cyclists. the main benefit to @TFL would be minimal cost as no road changes would be needed. Drivers would still have private transport.

going forward we will still need to social distance in November, and not many people will cycle on a wet November night.

force all boroughs to open bus lanes to PTW, by withholding improvement money unless done.

cycle lanes need better planning, too many are bad or dangerous. joining a cycle lane junctions and end of cycle lanes need reviewing.

as a rule of thumb 

keep cyclists moving

cycle paths should be a separate colour to pavement and roads.

when planning any road change remember if you make doing the right thing easy people will always do the right thing.

pavements need to be kept clear for pedestrians.

any street trade ( cafe tables and chairs) should be in parking bays not on the pavement.

stop the mixed messages, if you want to close a road don't just use bollards, close it and repave it so the whole street is a pedestrian area

school streels need to have the roads a different colour, in the Netherlands where pedestrians or cyclists have priority the road in not tarmac but either brick or cobblestone

If employment and economic growth really are important to the mayor and the assembly, their main focus should be there first and foremost. The more businesses can hire more people locally the more workers can help themselves more. This will lead to higher income through taxes and services and therefore a healthier budget. To this end, pro-growth policies should be adopted. Measures such as lower council taxes, reductions in locally administered charges such as ULEZ and deferred collection of rates will help businesses restart and workers get back onto a more stable level.

True equality is that of opportunity, not that of outcome. To this end, a focus on wide availability of jobs and an even wider availability of affordable quality education (upskilling) will help more people much more than yet further imposition of arbitrary diversity targets.

In regards to transport it would behoove the mayor to take inspiration from countries on the continent when planning for greener transport. Creating a less polluted city is a multi-year and complex effort, but it can be done, even against very tall odds.

Last but not least, elections for mayor should be held at the earliest opportunity. If people can shop regularly while social distancing, they can surely vote. Voters deserve to have a real opportunity to assess Mayor Khan's performance!

Having seen how other European cities and towns provide open-air spaces to restaurants, bars and pubs, I ask why London's local authorities are not doing the same in order to aid our economic recovery and save jobs. On a recent excursion to Greenwich, I noted the restaurants offering takeaways; but there is no effort by the council to provide open air seating with rain cover so that we can resume our way of life and sanity.

Now is the time that decision makers need to step-up to the plate to support businesses whilst providing confidence to consumers that we can step-out of our houses.

The change to the congestion charge on 22 June 2020 is going to stifle our economic recovery and prevent a return to normal way of life because of the economic impact it will have. As we open up our economy, we need to allow Londoners and visitors to move around confidently and with ease. Limiting cars to enter the congestion zone in the evenings and weekends is going to force people to drive to other areas for social and economic interactions.

I would strongly urge the Mayor and decisions makers to use the science of common sense in their policy making rather than the usual dogma.

This is such an amazing opportunity for us to embrace a "new normal", I'm sure I'm not the only person who doesn't want to go back to the old normal. A cleaner greener London would have such an impact on everything else, health, well-being and the economy. We want less development of our city and more green spaces. Can we have real tangible limits on how much and how many houses/buildings can be developed? So many houses in our area are now out of the price range of normal families, are sold to developers who know how they get their planning permission through the system and often turn properties into Houses of Multiple Occupancy, or sell them on for even more money. Usually the building work has a big environmental cost and our small but important urban green areas, our gardens, are being eaten up and paved over. We are among the last in our road to have a front garden, but these small spaces can be microcosms for nature. The overdevelopment of our city contributes to housing inequality, disillusionment for our young people for whom owning and even renting a home is out of the question, and has large environmental consequences. We want to build on the sense of community that has been established during this crisis, not to be part of an anonymous, overpriced urban block. 

Motorcycles and scooters are a menace and a nuisance to the 98% majority who don't use them.  Noisiest vehicles on the streets.  Especially noisy in residential areas.  Many riders - obviously not all, but plenty - casually and routinely break road traffic laws: riding in "no motor vehicles" zones, riding in cycle lanes, going the wrong way on one-way streets, mounting pavements, shooting red lights.  It's as if they think the laws don't apply to them because they have 2 wheels.  Uber and Deliveroo delivery riders are the worst - in my street, all day long taking a short-cut via the pavement, and going the wrong way on the one-way section.  They ride dangerously and aggressively: going round corners too fast, not slowing for pedestrians (trying to intimidate pedestrians), riding with one hand while on the phone with the other.  Many of them are recent arrivals in the UK - I guess it's an easy job to find if you don't have qualifications - and still ride in a style like they are on the streets of some southern mediterranean town or the hills of the Balkans.

* Food delivery riders need to be regulated by the Mayor of London.  Any road traffic breaches by the riders: fine the *company* not the rider.  Too many fines to the company: suspend its delivery licence.  This would quickly stop the problem.

* Motorised food deliveries should not be allowed after 11pm, either through licensing of the restaurants or directly through regulation of delivery companies.  Residents need to sleep.  Who is more important, London residents or Uber?

* There should be a phased programme toward electric-only food deliveries in central London - the same as for cabs.  So delivery bikes/scooters should be licensed, and newly licensed vehicles from 2021 should be electric only.

These problems are even worse now many people are home-working.  Street noise matters.

Fully support making more areas car free and promoting more pedestrian and bike use of the roads. The car pollution and aggressive driving is almost already back to pre COVID levels.

I agree with the scope as it touches on a broad range of areas. But do you also need to consider :
1) Impact of housing inequalities

2) Increased mental health support especially for primary school age children