770m for London cycleways

basingstoke123
Posts: 202
Joined: 13 Feb 2008, 10:05pm

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by basingstoke123 »

661-Pete wrote:I'm not too familiar with cycling around London, but I have found this: if you get off the main through routes you will often discover a network of much quieter back streets with almost no traffic, if you know your way you can often thread your way through those in relative safety. Progress will be slower and the distance greater because you'll constantly be making right and left turns, but you can often pick a route from start to finish with very little traffic.

At least that's what I found in the West End. It may be different in other parts of London.

Those who want to make quick progress are also those who are more likely to be able to handle heavy traffic, so they'll probably stick to the main roads. I've done that too - though it's not much fun! And far more dangerous. The CS network may indeed save lives.


The problem with trying to use the quieter back roads instead of the more direct and more major routes is that you need a lot of local knowledge. These routes are not signposted. You usually need to find linking paths between roads, and more importantly, where to avoid because you cannot get through! Few people will have sufficiently detailed knowledge beyond their immediate area (and I suspect the numbers of people people who know their immediate area well is reducing). It is also much more difficult to navigate a complicated route. Most maps are only reliable for roads, and are poor at showing paths, making planning a route difficult - although things are improving with the internet (and smart-phones which you can use when you get lost).

Many people are put of cycling because the only routes they know are the ones that they drive, and they are unwilling to cycle these routes because they are hostile for cycling (large roundabouts, fast dual carriageways, heavy traffic, complex junctions). There may be quieter routes - but you have to be willing to explore areas you don't know, which will mean (temporarily) getting lost the first few times. And there is a risk you might not find a suitable route - or at least, not the first try to two, and so end up on roads you are trying to avoid. This might not be a problem for experienced cyclists, but may be too much of a risk for the less experienced or less confident to even try. You also have to have the time to explore - you're not going to try a new uncertain route when trying to get to work on time.
bohrsatom
Posts: 807
Joined: 20 May 2013, 4:36pm

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by bohrsatom »

basingstoke123 wrote:The problem with trying to use the quieter back roads instead of the more direct and more major routes is that you need a lot of local knowledge. These routes are not signposted.


+1

And in central London you need a huge amount of local knowledge. I have been riding around town for more than 5 years and I still get lost in the jumble of 1-way system and no-through-roads in Soho. I've just about figured out a N-S and E-W route through the area and stick to them religiously. Knowing the backstreets at the same level as a cabbie doesn't encourage mass cycling.

The main issue with backstreets is that they are so much slower than the main roads. Wherever they meet a major road they cede priority and you have to wait forever at lights or in a long queue of traffic to get to the next 'neighbourhood' of backstreets. Any journey in London would involve crossing at least half a dozen of these areas, and with a 2 or 3 minute wait each time it really slows down your journey.

They are also narrow and often have parked cars on both sides. Add the ratrunning traffic and I often feel less safer on a side street than I do on a main road which usually has a bus or bike lane of some kind.

The money promised for cycling in London is great but I'm skeptical about Sadiq's commitment to cycling. Building proper cycleways like the N/S and E/W superhighway is going to be disruptive and involves making difficult decisions, often against the will of cabbies and NIMBYs and I'm not sure he is strong enough to push them through.

And all this money doesn't mean good quality infra. There is plenty of opportunity to waste the money. I have read that the original 'blue paint' superhighways cost between £2 and £4m a mile, and it's not hard to find examples of 'improvements' paid for out of cycling budget but do anything but. I would rather he spent nothing than laid more blue/red paint on the road.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by mjr »

basingstoke123 wrote:
661-Pete wrote:I'm not too familiar with cycling around London, but I have found this: if you get off the main through routes you will often discover a network of much quieter back streets with almost no traffic, if you know your way you can often thread your way through those in relative safety. Progress will be slower and the distance greater because you'll constantly be making right and left turns, but you can often pick a route from start to finish with very little traffic.

At least that's what I found in the West End. It may be different in other parts of London.

Those who want to make quick progress are also those who are more likely to be able to handle heavy traffic, so they'll probably stick to the main roads. I've done that too - though it's not much fun! And far more dangerous. The CS network may indeed save lives.


The problem with trying to use the quieter back roads instead of the more direct and more major routes is that you need a lot of local knowledge. These routes are not signposted.

Actually, in London, quite a lot of them are, as the old London Cycling Network, the newer Superhighways and Quietways or sometimes the National Cycle Network, but as others have mentioned, it varies wildly from borough to borough.

basingstoke123 wrote:You usually need to find linking paths between roads, and more importantly, where to avoid because you cannot get through! Few people will ...


Yes, the biggest problem is crossing barrier roads, especially it seems when it's a TfL road on the boundary between two boroughs, but not always. Sometimes there's a good connection between filtered streets (heading north between the bits of Museum Street), sometimes it's indirect (heading south from the Museum to Seven Dials) and sometimes it borders on scary (heading east across Upper Street Islington, if that's the one I think it is).

The new, protected CS network isn't popular among the people who feel they can handle heavy traffic because they don't like being confined in lanes with pootlers like me and say they get abused if they continue to use the carriageway. They would rather have more bus lanes.

basingstoke123 wrote:Many people are put of cycling because the only routes they know are the ones that they drive, and they are unwilling to cycle these routes because they are hostile for cycling (large roundabouts, fast dual carriageways, heavy traffic, complex junctions). There may be quieter routes - but you have to be willing to explore areas you don't know, which will mean (temporarily) getting lost the first few times. And there is a risk you might not find a suitable route - or at least, not the first try to two, and so end up on roads you are trying to avoid. This might not be a problem for experienced cyclists, but may be too much of a risk for the less experienced or less confident to even try. You also have to have the time to explore - you're not going to try a new uncertain route when trying to get to work on time.

Amen! Signposting (even Dutch-style lamppost markers) would be relatively cheap in terms of resources, but it would need a consistent long-term effort to keep them up and up-to-date, as well as to defend the routes against the constant pressure from non-residents to open bollards/gates to allow rat-running again.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by MikeF »

andrewk wrote:
MikeF wrote:Khan said he was delivering on his manifesto promise to be “the most pro-cycling mayor London has ever had”. Any pictures of him on a bike? Boris was always being photographed on a bike.


Boris was a cyclist, Khan isn't but don't knock him for that. One doesn't have to be a cyclist oneself in order to prioritise investment in cycling infrastructure. Boris got the ball rolling with regard to investment in cycling infrastructure, Khan has picked up the ball and given it added impetus. Bravo!
I hope he can deliver on cycling. Unfortunately not being a "cyclist" doesn't help him achieve that. There are just too many councillors who think they know what cyclists need, because it's something other people do, and not them. Crackpot cycling infrastructure abounds in plenty, and plenty of money can apparently be readily spent. However it's aimed at being a sop for cyclists whilst maintaining the status quo for motor vehicles. It's not the money that counts but what is achieved with that expenditure.

As I posted above https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/info/50016/sustainable_travel/564/birmingham_cycle_revolution. Britain's second largest city cycling initiative! :evil: A cycling revolution????? Is this all the council can achieve?? :evil:
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by MikeF »

Vorpal wrote:
MikeF wrote:Khan said he was delivering on his manifesto promise to be “the most pro-cycling mayor London has ever had”. Any pictures of him on a bike? Boris was always being photographed on a bike.
Thanks. One of those seems to be not on a Boris bike. It won't just depend on him though he needs a good team to support cycling.
Edit But it's not looking good https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2016/nov/17/five-london-cycling-tests-for-sadiq-khan
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by Si »

MikeF wrote:As I posted above https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/info/50016/sustainable_travel/564/birmingham_cycle_revolution. Britain's second largest city cycling initiative! :evil: A cycling revolution????? Is this all the council can achieve?? :evil:



The empire strikes back... :wink:

http://www.bhamcyclerevolution.org.uk/p ... yOak_route

Actually, if we ignore the infra issues, BCC has done some great stuff...especially in deprived areas....... that is causing lots of other cities to take notice (holds hands up and claimed small vested interest here). Just that the infra has been somewhat lagging behind so far.
Stevek76
Posts: 2085
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by Stevek76 »

I'll remain sceptical until it happens. Anyone needing to put decent cycling infrastructure in is inevitably going to ruffle feathers and he needs to show he can do that, not act like the Bristol mayor. Still, at least he has money.

Here in Bristol we have a lack of money and a mayor who mostly babbles on about a mix of inclusivity etc and management speak like a classic MBA stereotype and for the most part seems to be unwilling to upset anyone, as such seems to be heading down the consulting and reviewing everything rather than doing anything route.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by thirdcrank »

I'm happy to be identified as cynical over the regular claims that megabucks have been earmarked for cycling (Has anybody here seen Kelly? :lol: :lol: :lol: ) but I'd be prepared to believe that this mayor means it. Apart from anything else, the traffic situation in London is becoming so dire that it is one of the biggest factors promoting cycling whatever the politicians and highwaymen do.

From my remote vantage point - North of the M62 :lol: - I'll suggest that the big area of doubt is the quality of what's provided. That must be obvious too to somebody like this chap and if it wasn't, a short ride (photo opportunity?) with Chris Boardman will surely have disabused him of any doubts about the issues.

But to whom does he turn, to achieve the necessary high standards of provision? The UK transport engineering community is steeped in providing for motor traffic and views cycling as at best marginal, at worst a cause of increased casualties and reduced road capacity. "Cycling officers" tend to be way down in the lowerarchy. :idea: Enlist a body of what are known in the trade as "practitioners," cyclists to you and me, to advise and pass judgment. But as any highwayman will be quick to crow "Cyclists don't know what they want."

I think the Bedford turbo roundabout - and even up here in LS27, I know that's not quite in London, but the principles still apply - offers a good case study of what happens. This is my summary, short on detail: govt announces yet another dollop of dosh for cycling, but with schemes being vetted by a body of cyclists (Okay, okay Sustrans is the lead member :roll: ) and a highway authority with that rare species - a cycle-friendly cycling officer - puts forward an innovative scheme. Things wobble when, in my well-known phrase or saying "the big misters who provide for motor traffic" get hold of the plans, but the cycling experts decide it's best not to protest.

All 29 pages here for anybody needing more detail

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=84180
PRL
Posts: 607
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 9:14pm
Location: Richmond upon Thames

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by PRL »

thirdcrank wrote:This is my summary, short on detail: govt announces yet another dollop of dosh for cycling, but with schemes being vetted by a body of cyclists (Okay, okay Sustrans is the lead member :roll: ) and a highway authority with that rare species - a cycle-friendly cycling officer - puts forward an innovative scheme. Things wobble when, in my well-known phrase or saying "the big misters who provide for motor traffic" get hold of the plans, but the cycling experts decide it's best not to protest.



In London there is another layer of complication. Mayor promises dosh for cycling ( but not that much in terms of what is needed. Quietway = Cheap Cycle Route ). Borough Councils are asked to cooperate on scheme and make compromises to keep within budget and for fear of motorists backlash. Scheme is published and backlash happens anyway (taking a parking space from a motorist is like taking cub from a tigress). Cycling groups support the scheme despite the compromises. Watch this space for result.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: 770m for London cycleways

Post by thirdcrank »

Here's where some of the dosh is going

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38376672
Post Reply