Cycling UK Forum

The pre-election proposals for spending on the roads are out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30269231

Money being sloshed about throughout the land, but already the naysayers are pointing out that it's just re-announcing old stuff. As cyclists, we are familiar with that. The following was tucked away at the bottom of the BBC item in my link:

There was also £100m available to improve cycling provision at 200 key locations across the network, as well as a commitment to cycle-proof any new schemes being developed.

More turbo roundabouts on the drawing board, even if they install something else using the dosh?

Cycle-proofing has been mentioned on here before, but not often. NB It's not blathering your commuting hack with Waxoyl in preparation for winter.

This is from the CTC website:-

http://www.ctc.org.uk/blog/chris-peck/c ... n-practice

In short, it sounds like a watered-down version of the audit bit of Cycle Audit and Review. As I've already implied, "proofing" is confusing word here. No doubt some govt., spin merchant would explain that it means something like "testing the standard" as with firearms and "proof" spirit. OTOH, to your typical driver, "cycle-proofing" a junction would probably be assumed to mean "getting cyclists out of the way." I suppose it might be a cunning plan to smuggle in better cycling infrastructure. But there again, perhaps not. IME, the people who make the decisions will be no better informed than that typical driver.

Well if the dual the A358 like they are suggesting its going to be even more of a pain in the bum to cross than it is now... I hope the do take that into account and put some routes over it. I'm fully expecting them not to though, as I am fully expecting this to not actually happen...

A Cycle Proofing Working Group was mentioned a few times during the recent consultations on the Cycling Delivery Plan but I don't remember much more than that. It also appears in https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... r-everyone but nowhere else on that website. http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/fil ... ng_brf.pdf says CTC is represented. http://pedaller.org.uk/2014/11/28/bingl ... ing-bizzo/ describes Bryony Dyer and lists other groups represented, including Sustrans and Transport for London. I note with disappointment that Cyclenation isn't there - I wonder if it's because some local groups have been getting more and more radical and clearcut while road designs have been getting worse and worse.

A request to the DfT for the full membership and the index of its papers at http://www.whatDoTheyKnow.com may be enlightening if anyone has the time.

One would imagine that, given the money spent on building a lovely new dual carriageway, then whacking down a 2 metre wide cycle path alongside shouldn't add too much to the costs at all?

Now I don't particularly like cycling beside busy roads, but such schemes have their uses in connecting up bits of road which would otherwise be useless as they join onto an impossibly busy A-road.

If we can't have proper cycle facilities baked into new build roads, what possible hope is their for retro-fitting?

Mark1978 wrote:... what possible hope is their for retro-fitting?

Given that they've not thought up any weasel words to replace the Review bit of Cycle Audit and Review somewhere between zero and sod all.

The announced scheme west/east from my village is an upgrade from single to dual carriageway. If they leave the old road in place I will love it. If they don't I'll hate it. They reckon £250-500m just for that one road scheme, so £100m for all cycle schemes is a mere scratch. Skimming through the documents, cycling and walking is given lip service. "We mustn't make things much worse for them."

Of course, this is a Strategic Road Investment Strategy, not designed for local traffic. Equally of course, this is a pre-election promise, designed to delight the Conservative majority around here.

Oh, yeah, just before closing down all the web pages, I see they have come up with the bright idea of "Expressways". Just like motorways but without the inconvenience of having to ensure alternatives for non-motorway users. Gee, isn't that great. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... vision.pdf p49.

Expressways aren't new. There's the A45 Nene Valley Expressway (now called just Nene Valley Way) near Northampton and the A38 Devon Expressway to name just two. The NVW has an avoiding cycleway on nearby side-streets and tracks (most of it's now NCN 539 apparently) until you reach Ecton and then it wanders off. I don't know whether the Devon one does - I've never noticed much of one and on maps, it all looks to go wrong between Exeter and its racecourse, with road stubs that look like they could have been useful walking and cycling links if they hadn't been cut off.

Ah, thanks. I hadn't come across the term before.

You hadn't come across the term before because it was deeply unfashionable until the recent resurgance of trying to build our way out of congestion. It had been consigned to the dustbin of history, quite rightly IMO. Whatever next? Return of the Underways? Another attempt at Controlled Traffic Areas?

Just seen on the news that the majority of ''roads money'' will be spent in UKIP ''heartlands''

I think "expressway" covers more than one type of road. I first remember the term from the motorway approaching Spagehetti Junction which it seems is still referred to as the Aston Expressway, although that may be no longer its name. It was there when I attended a junior CID course in 1973 in Brum. In modern circumstances, it rolls better off the spinning machine than "motorway-in-all-but-name. "

For decades we have been building motorways without calling them motorways. So it's better to be honest about it.

Just build alternative routes.

snibgo wrote:Oh, yeah, just before closing down all the web pages, I see they have come up with the bright idea of "Expressways". Just like motorways but without the inconvenience of having to ensure alternatives for non-motorway users. Gee, isn't that great. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... vision.pdf p49.

There is some hope for the non-motons, on p10 (numbered p9) of the PDF you linked to there is the following

Our busiest A-Roads will become Expressways, providing improved standards of performance, with technology to manage traffic, and mile a minute speeds. Improved design standards will give greater consideration to the needs of walkers, cyclists and local communities along with the aesthetic appearance of the network.
(my emphasis)

Provided they can be persuaded to do a proper job.

Rick.

Cycle facilities = "Build it and they will come!"

Motor facilities = "They're all already here! DO something!"