Cycle ways ( in London ) are a waste of Space?

[mercalia]

They take up much needed space to convey motor traffic more efficiently

An interesting test of this proposition

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2018/02/08/a-waste-of-space/

[NUKe]

What a brilliant article, and it just shows how easy it is to misjudge situations. There was a similar thing a while back showing space taken up by cars compared to cycles.

[irc]

Depends on location. A plan to build an on road segregated facility in my area was rejected. Rightly so in my opinion. The road is currently safe to cycle. The new facility would have reduced road capacity in a place where cyclists are 1% of users.

[[XAP]Bob]

Or maybe it would have enabled more cyclists to use that route...

[TrevA]

They take up much needed space to convey motor traffic more efficiently

An interesting test of this proposition

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2018/02/08/a-waste-of-space/

I get what the guy is trying to say, but he seems to have forgotten about the cab drivers. So his cars with no occupants actually have 1 occupant. Cars are still a massive waste of road space when you can fit 6 cyclists into the space of 1 car.

[mercalia]

They take up much needed space to convey motor traffic more efficiently

An interesting test of this proposition

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2018/02/08/a-waste-of-space/

I get what the guy is trying to say, but he seems to have forgotten about the cab drivers. So his cars with no occupants actually have 1 occupant. Cars are still a massive waste of road space when you can fit 6 cyclists into the space of 1 car.

well I think he is right to discount them as they have no reason to be there apart from having a passenger - would also be right to discount the riders of those rickshaws you around soho and oxford st.

[Postboxer]

Is it by chance there's no busses? It would depend on how many people were on it though what it would do to the figures.

[mercalia]

Is it by chance there's no busses? It would depend on how many people were on it though what it would do to the figures.

I think its cars v bikes rather than also buses. The propotion of cars:buses must be very very high in London, Cars are the problem? if there were no cars, the roads would be almost empty

[pwa]

I'm totally ignorant on the subject of cycling in London.

How far do London commuters travel to get to work? Surely it must be slower than cycle commuting in less congested places.

[TrevA]

I once caught a London bus from Waterloo to Oxford Street. I could have walked it faster, the bus didn't move at all at one point for 10 minutes, along the Strand. This was around 3.30pm, so not really proper rush hour, but London traffic is so bad, even outside rush hour, that it hardly moves. Bike, Tube or Walking are the best way to get around.

My son lives in Leytonstone and works near St Pauls. He can cycle it in 25 minutes. It takes 40 door to door on the tube. He lives about 3 mins walk from the tube station and his office is right next to St Pauls tube station.

[jgurney]

How far do London commuters travel to get to work? Surely it must be slower than cycle commuting in less congested places.

My own journey is 10 miles, from Teddington to Hammersmith. Cycling usually takes about 50mins. By rail (including walking to the station and waiting to change trains at Richmond) takes 55mins.

[pwa]

How far do London commuters travel to get to work? Surely it must be slower than cycle commuting in less congested places.

My own journey is 10 miles, from Teddington to Hammersmith. Cycling usually takes about 50mins. By rail (including walking to the station and waiting to change trains at Richmond) takes 55mins.

55 minutes seems quite good for 10 miles.

[MikeF]

Depends on location. A plan to build an on road segregated facility in my area was rejected. Rightly so in my opinion. The road is currently safe to cycle. The new facility would have reduced road capacity in a place where cyclists are 1% of users.

I don't know the road referred to, but is that your opinion or that of those that don't cycle? Many people give the reason they won't cycle on roads is that it is unsafe.
The article is making the point that road capacity is about the number of people that can use it at any one time. Cars occupy a lot of space for just 1 person. Regent Street in London, for example, is a big wide street often packed with pedestrians who occupy a small area compared with that of the carriageway occupied by a few.

Apparently drivers in London "lost" 74 hours in 2017 in rush hour (motor) traffic. That sounds a lot, but assuming those drivers work on 200 days a year that equates to 22 minutes a day or on a commute 11 minutes in each direction. The only other lost time would be walking from the front door to the car and from the car to the destination at the end of the journey. That probably took very little time. Compare that with someone who used the bus or train. That person would have to "waste time" travelling to the bus stop or train station, and then "waste time" waiting for the bus or train. The total time "wasted time" by those who don't use a car is far greater than those that do. What are car drivers complaining about????

[captain offensive]

I'm totally ignorant on the subject of cycling in London.

How far do London commuters travel to get to work? Surely it must be slower than cycle commuting in less congested places.

It's 15 years since i lived there and the new cycle routes have sped things up since, but my house mate and i worked at the same place. If we left at the same time I could cycle (tooting to hackney), get a shower and be at my desk at work before he would get in (combination of walk to tube, northern line, and a bus)

[softlips]

I quite like cycling in London now the new lanes are established. I’ve used the Boris bikes several times and I’m now seriously considering a Brompton. A few years ago I thought cycling in London was too dangerous.