Cycling UK Forum

Si wrote:

Simon L6 wrote:

Phil Jones wrote:On that basis, can I take it that CTC members have a preference for unsegregated paths over segregated ones - (even though they may not like off road paths at all )

Thanks again

Phil

that's the kind of research that gives research a bad name. What use it to be put to - or are we simply going to read that 'CTC members are in favour of unsegregated paths'?

We have been commissioned by Sustrans to carry out a review of the advantages and disadvantages of segregated and non-segregated traffic-free cycle and pedestrian routes.

read more at:

http://www.philjonesassociates.co.uk

depressing stuff

Phil Jones is a member of a body called the 'Institution of Highways and Transportation', which conducts a survey of 100 of its 'leading members' every month. In answer to the question 'should bicycles and motor vehicles be kept apart on busy roads?' the 100 leading members responded thusly



which proves that 53% is an awful lot more than 47% and that people with lots of initials after their name might want to consider the obvious - that cyclists use busy roads rather than unbusy roads because busy roads generally go where people want to go. Would Phil like to comment on the MIHT's segregationists - and are all 53 'leading members' supporters of Sustrans?

Simon L6 wrote: 53% is an awful lot more than 47%

Darrell Huff redux

dan_b wrote:

Simon L6 wrote: 53% is an awful lot more than 47%

Darrell Huff redux

I had to look that one up. Thankyou!

A new masterplan for the regeneration of the Allens West site in Eaglescliffe into a sustainable, mixed-use development, received the official go-ahead from Stockton on Tees Council’s Planning Committee on 23 July 2008.

The masterplan drawn up by JG Land & Estates (JGLE), the owner of this brownfield site includes new homes; affordable housing for local people; accommodation for older people and a small local shop, in addition to retaining and expanding the site’s existing employment opportunities.

The planning application also provides other benefits including a park and ride facility for Allens West station; protection and enhancement of wildlife habitats on site; a teen recreational area and funding towards local sports facilities. It was prepared following extensive studies by JGLE’s professional team, including transport and housing needs surveys and a public consultation on the initial design proposals which took place in 2007.

http://www.allenswest.co.uk/
http://www.philjonesassociates.co.uk/htm/projects.htm

to continue with my research into transport planning consultants - the question being do they prefer the term brownfield site to greenfield site? - those of you with a taste for urban planning might want to consider the aerial photograph in the first link with the sweeeeet plan in the second link, and ponder the merits of the eco-prefix....

ah yes, I see they meant to say 'development on green fields next to a brownfield site.'

and for those of you wanting to know the meaning of the words 'employment zone' - the answer is at hand. Once again, this is a two link thing. If only Kant were alive today - the immanent critique is just a couple of clicks away....

http://www.allenswest.co.uk/masterplan.html

http://www.allenswest.co.uk/downloads/A ... ochure.pdf - in this instance the 20% may be a return on land values

warehouses that are convenient for the main commuter routes. If any of you were in the slightest bit interested in my banging on about planning policy taking this country to hell in a handcart, then ponder, just for a while, how building low-rise housing with car parking on green fields on the edge of town, remote from anything approaching a community (there will be a 'small shop' and the developer, one imagines, is negotiating a lump sum payment to the Council for education needs) becomes 'sustainable'. Although the bike racks may well be made out of recycled steel. In the Philipines. Would Phil care to explain?

Simon L6 wrote:those of you with a taste for urban planning might want to consider the aerial photograph in the first link with the sweeeeet plan in the second link, and ponder the merits of the eco-prefix....

Can't see too many direct route bridleways, and the road network does seem to offer a rat-run....

Phil conducted a study into the likely effect of all the extra motor vehicle traffic generated by the development on a nearby roundabout. Apparently there will be no additional delay. Would a sustainable transport proposal have included the conversion of the roundabout into traffic lights? With ASLs and a six second head start for cyclists? Given that the local council and Sport England will be getting near on two million quid in b...., no, sorry, incentives, you'd think the money was there.

Here's the challenge. If this is a sustainable development, cap car parking at ten percent (for the infirm or the morbidly obese). Use the space saved from tarmac to build more houses (££££!) or, if you prefer, save some of the trees that are presently on the site, but not TPO'd. Given that the layout of the estate (soon to be executive estate) is clearly set by car movements I'm not confident that's going to happen.

In fairness to Phil, who, as his photograph clearly demonstrates, is a thoroughly likeable chap....

Dear Phil - it's only fair to let you know that I'm taking the mickey out of you on the CTC forum.
Don't feel obliged to respond. I just wouldn't want you not to know.
Simon Legg

followed by

Thanks Simon!
I knew I’d end up getting more than I bargained for!
The debate was genuinely useful though.
All the best
Phil

Simon L6 wrote:the suggestion that people might flock to cycle paths because they are safe is mistaken. Cast your mind back to the seventh of July bombings. For three weeks after you could not get into a cycle shop in the centre of London for crowds of people taking to cycling because they were afraid to go on the tube. And what did these fearful newbies do? Reach for their LCN+ maps? Not a bit of it. Toes pointed outward, inappropriate shorts exposing lengths of builders crack, they pounded straight down the main roads, weaving through traffic without, as far as one could judge, a care in the world.

Cycling numbers on the Regents Canal towpath absolutely soared after 7/7. Ask British Waterways. The Regents might not be LCN+ but nor is it a main road.

As for the original question: IMX pedestrians simply don't understand what the white line down the middle means, unless the cycle section is liberally festooned with paintings of bikes and (ideally) is in a different colour.

Calandra wrote:Surely one has only to look to the traditional bridleway or the newer restricted byway to see a REAL non-motorised multi-user path? There is surprisingly little conflict on most of these, other than when illegal motorbikes and 4WDs invade. I will grant you that most of them are unsuitable for fast cycling - but so are most Sustrans routes that I have used, and which are available (legally) for a far narrower group of users,

Er, not quite.

The majority of "traditional bridleways" and "restricted byways" round here have no conflict simply because they are uncyclable with anything other than the hardiest MTB. In fact, several of them are virtually unwalkable if there's been any rain within the last month.

In contrast, on the great majority of the 2,000-ish miles of NCN I've cycled, most users get along very well. The worst conflict I've seen on "multi-use routes" is actually on those canal towpaths which aren't part of the NCN and haven't been sensibly managed for multi-use.

I am prepared to believe that your local experience may be different, but that's no foundation for you to generalise with phrases like "A major flaw with all Sustrans routes" (my itals).

Richard Fairhurst wrote:

Simon L6 wrote:Cycling numbers on the Regents Canal towpath absolutely soared after 7/7. Ask British Waterways. The Regents might not be LCN+ but nor is it a main road.

.

There may have been an increase in percentage terms (although I'm not sure how great an increase, and, to be fair, my desk looked over the towpath, and the ridiculous ramp that I drew) but nothing compared to the increase on the A10 (Kingsland Road) that runs across it (same desk, same view). And the Regents towpath is at capacity. The A10 has a long way to go...