Dissertation: Cycling Infrastructure + Your Input

[drossall]

That's absolutely true, although of course in the case above money has already been spent, and so was deemed appropriate, but may not have been spent in such a way as to solve the actual problem. Instead, we appear to have the cycling equivalent of a motorway spur road that ends at a bridle path.

[pwa]

It is a very common complaint: goodish cycle lanes or tracks that are not joined to decent cycle routes and just feed you onto an unappealing road for no reason other than that the money ran out.

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5457293 ... 6?hl=en-GB

This is on the Celtic Trail, and I was employed by the company that created it. It was a compromise. The people who made it wanted the route to go under the main road and remain traffic-free. But a mains gas pipe goes under the road at that point, and the cost of shifting that would have been astronomical. Way beyond the budget available. So the route went onto the road for a bit. This example at least has a reason, but many just make you wonder.

[thirdcrank]

I'm struggling slightly on what to focus on with my research, as it is easy to be too broad so I need to narrow my scope - any one have any ideas on what I should look into?

I think you should first decide what the infrastructure is to be used for. Is it for leisure purposes or commuting to work/shops etc? Leisure purposes, like old rail way rotes, or commuting with cycle lanes on the road which go directly to where people want to go, not 3 times round the houses on the way. This is a constant problem that Sustrans has.
(My emphasis.)

IMO a big problem is that the overriding purpose of the attempts to provide for cyclists in this country (I'd be slow to dignify it with the word "infrastructure") is to get them out of the road. Just about any rubbish will do. I agree wholeheartedly with the distinction made by tatanab - I've posted before that riders wanting to go from A to B get no benefit from scenic cycle route from Y to Z.

[drossall]

Hopefully the OP is still reading!!!

I've mentioned before, as a different example, the A11 upgrade north of Mildenhall. What I believe is needed is to think like a strategic road builder, which, oddly, they seemingly didn't.

Thus, experience from the M25 and elsewhere says that routes aimed at long journeys will attract a lot of local traffic. Also, any strategic road builder must surely pull back and look at how the current proposal fits into the overall network. Apply those things to bikes between Cambridge and Norwich, and you immediately see that there's not much in the way of alternative routes of any kind to the A11, especially in the middle section, and that any route provided is therefore likely to serve (bike) traffic between towns and villages - OK, not in vast volumes, but then it's not a superhighway that you'd build, and it doesn't have to stretch from Cambridge to Norwich, any more than the upgraded A11 section itself does. You're just connecting to what's already there.

That missing middle section is filled only by the A11, which was never a pleasant road for cycling, and certainly isn't now. Elsewhere, cyclists would be likely to use the alternative parallel roads, many of which are B roads and quite direct, so there isn't a great need for cycle provision along the whole A11, but the section from Mildenhall to Thetford is critical in connecting two important tourist areas (and their local towns and villages, remember).

In fact, the planning seems to have focused only on providing two or three crossing points for east-west leisure routes, with no strategic thought at all. Oddly, there is a cycle route half way, from Thetford to south of Elvedon, but it expires where the line of the old road has been taken by the new. There's nothing at all, not even a poor-quality cindered track with bad sight lines and lots of Give Ways, to get cyclists the relatively short distance from there to Mildenhall Woods, where a minor road joins up with B roads to Cambridge and the south (for those who want to go that far). Putting a track alongside the new road, using the existing B1112 underpass, would have been a much better use of the money spent on some farcilities!

[thirdcrank]

Hopefully the OP is still reading!!!

I've mentioned before, as a different example, the A11 upgrade north of Mildenhall. What I believe is needed is to think like a strategic road builder, which, oddly, they seemingly didn't. ...
(My emphasis.)

This is one of the reasons why I bang on so much about Guidelines for Cycle Audit and Cycle Review which was intended to achieve exactly that. This is an extract from the foreword by Glenda Jackson CBE MP Minister for Local Transport (and more recently a national treasure. )

These Guidelines will help to ensure that the needs of cyclists are built into the local transport planning process to help bring about the changes we all want to see. Cycle audit procedures can help ensure the needs of cyclists are not overlooked as new schemes are developed. And cycle review can be used both to assess the cycle friendliness of existing infrastructure, and to help determine ways in which changes could be made to improve it.

This from the executive summary:

The purpose of Cycle Audit is to ensure that opportunities to improve conditions for cycling are properly considered in new transport schemes and that conditions are not inadvertently made worse for cyclists.

I could quote more but I shelled out something like £25 a couple of decades ago for my copy and I bought it in anticipation of it being useful. It's still available for anybody with more money than sense.
http://www.ciht.org.uk/en/knowledge/pub ... eview-1996

I hope the OP has benefited from visiting this forum, if not necessarily in the way they had anticipated.

[pga]

George
Just saw your request. You might find my useful 1974 MA dissertation 'Planning for the urban cyclist: a study of Greater Manchester' (University of Sheffield). A copy should still be in the Manchester City Library.

A lot has happened since then and there is much more material to sift through. However, my ,main conclusions since then are:

1 Some cyclists want segregation, others prefer to share roads with motor vehicles.

2 Cycling and walking will only make progress when motor vehicle use is restrained and cyclists and walkers are always given priority at junctions

3 Political will, both nationally and locally,is sadly lacking in the UK. We are well behind most of Western Europe and indeed many others countries of the world. This is linked to the lack of UK general public awareness of the damage motor vehicles cause and the benefits of cycling and walking, not just on health but on the physical environment and the economy.

Good luck with your project.

[Ron]

1. What are your thoughts on the UKs provision of cycling infrastructure, is it adequate?

Woefully inadequate, and much of what has been constructed fails to comply with laid down standards.

2. Could more be done, would you like to see the UK cities following in the footsteps of cities like Copenhagen?

Yes more could be done, the UK is close to the bottom of the league in Europe when it comes to cycling infastructure.

3. Does cycling infrastructure such as segregated cycle lanes make you feel safe, or do you prefer the freedom of the open roads?

My answer would depend entirely on the speed and volume of motor traffic on the open road you had in mind.

4. Would you prefer more green lanes, such as routes following canals - integrated into urban routes to enhance the experience?
Not necessarily, as a utility cyclist I want direct routes to the places I want to go to, and as a touring or leisure cyclist I would appreciate more scenic routes.
5. Do you enjoy your cycle commute, what would make it better?
I don't commute. If the nationals speed limit (60mph) was to be reduced and enforced I would feel happier.

I find some of your wording unclear, are you researching UK cycling nationwide urban and rural , or cycling in UK cities only?

[mattsccm]

Might I suggest that you point out that you are only looking at urban cycling. That's obvious as realistically the only thing needed in rural areas is a bit less speed and a bit more distance when passing.
Of course you are not alone in considering cycle commuting as purely an urban thing. It even happens here.

[Revolution]

Hi George,
I don't know how valid the answer to Q1 would be if asked to cyclists.
Q2. referencing Copenhagan - perhaps better to illustrate specific examples of infrastructure there.
Q3. "freedom of the open roads" saying yes to this makes one sound a bit reckless
Q4. specific to urban cyclists - again an illustration would help.

in general I think it would help if your questions had an up and a down side eg "would you prefer segregated cycle lanes even if they would require slower cycling" this would give me the opportunity to think more about what is important before answering.
Hope this helps

[tykeboy2003]

1. What are your thoughts on the UKs provision of cycling infrastructure, is it adequate?
2. Could more be done, would you like to see the UK cities following in the footsteps of cities like Copenhagen?
3. Does cycling infrastructure such as segregated cycle lanes make you feel safe, or do you prefer the freedom of the open roads?
4. Would you prefer more green lanes, such as routes following canals - integrated into urban routes to enhance the experience?
5. Do you enjoy your cycle commute, what would make it better?

1. Very poor, totally inadequate.
2. Absolutely, yes.
3. I have little experience of segregated cycle lanes, there are none round where I live (South Derbyshire) unless you count shared use pavements, I think I rode on one in Bristol and possibly in London. They obviously made little impression on me.
4. Absolutely, as it happens I've raised a Government petition to have tow paths upgraded to 2m wide with tarmac, it should be going live soon.
5. I do enjoy my cycle commute - in the summer months. The rest of the year the bit of Route 63 I use is usually muddy and waterlogged and I have to go on the roads which is far less pleasant.

[basingstoke123]

I see that this is a 2 year old thread.

Does anyone know George Wagstaff got on with his dissertation? A quick Google search shows that he graduated with a BA Honours in Environmental Management later that year (congratulations). So his dissertation was successful. Unlike the efforts to cater for cycling in the UK (whether through specific infrastructure, or not designing out cycling from the road system).