Blackfriars Flashride Friday @8.30

ndru

As some of you know TfL has produced an update to their crap design on Blackfriars Bridge. The thing is it's no improvement really and they don't seem to get it still. So LCC is standing up and organising a flashride across the Blackfriars Bridge on Friday 20th May.
Read about it at http://ibikelondon.blogspot.com/2011/05/flash-ride-for-blackfriars-bridge.html.

Cleat Eastwood

what are you talking about?

King Donut

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

what are you talking about?

Hamsters

Sanderville

I would be there since this is on my commute but I'm having physio at exactly 8:30 :-(

DonDaddyD

what are you talking about?

Hamsters

Actually it's quite serious.

Blackfriars Bridge was the scene of quite a public bike/vehicle collision that resulted in a death.

It was since redesigned to improve the safety of cyclists. Despite this, I was strongly advised not to commute over Blackfriars Bridge. Didn't listen and the two times I did I was serverly cut up in the same place. I've never ridden over it since and I won't. I think its that dangerous.

The current road layout has a cycle lane on the left leading towards the lights. There is a left turning leading to the Embankment just before the lights that cuts across the cycle lane. When the lights go green cyclist use the cycle lane to go forward while at the same time some traffic turn left over the cyclist. Time it wrong and you are either cut up, squeezed or worse.

Yes you could take primary but it is easier said. The lead up to Blackfriars Bridge is narrow and in the mornings with the heavy density of traffic (buses and taxis) you are almost instinctively forced left for safety and into THAT cycle lane.

That any 'improvement' could make it worse is a worry. What is a bigger worry is that this road layout is very similar to the one from Oval tube where the road splits into several lanes left towards Kennington road, straight towards Kennington tube and a cycle superhighway cutting right across traffic so you can go straight.

(i) I think both need sensible tweaking
(ii) I don't want to seem them make it worse by following Blackfriars example.

If this 'Flashride' stance will get people listening to cyclists when it comes to road/junction layout then all the better and one I think, in all seriousness, should be supported.

snooks

DonDaddyD wrote:

Blackfriars Bridge was the scene of quite a public bike/vehicle collision that resulted in a death.

Two deaths actually, one at the end where all the work is, another closer to the south side when a bus overtook a young lady on a bike, only he didn't, he killed her.

It's also been the scene of another accident when a young woman was trapped under the wheels of a truck.

Southwark Bridge is much safer

BTW anyone know why there was someone on there this morning monitoring traffic going across Southwark Bridge?

roger_merriman

It does look nasty, as DDD said the temptation to use the bikelane would be strong, and then the chance of a left hook is there.

I rarely hit that part of town and not at rush hour, so I don't know how fast or not the traffic is, though on the whole tends to slower the more central you go in london, thus would not rolling though the right lane be a option?

richVSrich

I dont go over blackfriars, i turn down embankment there, but it is a bloomin mess..there is just so much of every kind of traffic trying to get across blackfriars southbound...
!
from the new plans it is good that they are keeping the cycle lane, however as previously mentioned it is still not great..

the two vehicle lanes heading southbound over the bridge seem extremely tight esp with the cycle lane there...obviously this would be within th deisgn limits but you will have:

cycle lane - bus - car all squeezed in on the approach to the bridge...i saw some crazy boris riding kids today going round that corner as i was waiting to go down embankment: one them was shouting "touch the bus! touch the bus!" as it went pass them...that highlights a) their a bit nuts, b) there is no space at all in the cycle lane.

if you do join in the flash ride, remember to stay safe, and dont antagonise other road users . i hope TfL take notice!

prj45

Why do they always have to do these things half way through the day? 8.30am? I'm out of the shower and sitting down to my desk by then!

iPete

Oh, so this is what I've been reading about for aaages and the pennies dropped that its now on my new commute! (Crossing to Waterloo or onto embankment).

It hasn't struck me as particularly bad but the statistics speak for themselves.

Do I want to leave the house at 7 to make this, hmmm :?

edit: f*ck it, gonna strap the gopro on now for good measure..

navt

Wuz here. Anything to keep it safe for London. This bridge is part of my commute. Has been for the last 4 years.

notsoblue

How was it? I couldn't make it in the end. Did you record any of it, iPete?

Headhuunter

I cycled past and saw it. Didn't stop, was late for work. They were handing out flyers. There were about 70 or 80 cyclists at the southern end of the bridge next to the north bound carriageway. I wish them luck. TFL seems to be increasingly prioritising "traffic flow" over safety since the Tories got in. They have removed a number of traffic lit pedestrian crossings on major roads across London and as we see here, were intending to do away with the northbound cycle lane on a major route and give the space over to motorists at the same time as removing the 20mph speed limit (which to be honest, no one adheres to anyway and police do not enforce). It's amazing that under a so called "cycling Mayor" that this goes on and makes a mockery of the so called "cycling revolution" in London....

iPete

hmmm it was interesting, quite a big protest (i have no comparison!) had to rescue a few people from irate motorbikes and calm down the riders & i wasn't even 100% sure why I was there.

Had the GoPro hooked up but won't know till later if its any good. Probably won't upload it. I did manage to pick out Gaz & say hello, so if your reading your more than welcome to some extra footage.

daviesee

This simply highlights the short comings of cycle lanes.

Cyclists quite rightly want to flow along the cycle lane while traffic wants to turn left.
Conflict is inevitable.
Doing away with cycle lanes will result in wider roads that everyone can share. Primary for going straight, right for turning right and left for turning left or slow. Traffic merges and everything works out fine. In theory but it will never work as common sense would appear to be non-existant.

Trouble with the "it'll never work" arguement is that it works remarkably well on the roads I use and very few of them have cycle lanes. Okay, the roads are quieter here but busy roads slows down the motorists and makes it even easier for cyclists. Unless said cyclists are impatient and cut through traffic at improper times. These cyclists only have themselves to blame.

Patience is required by all commuters, regardless of mode, and that is my main point.

Headhuunter

daviesee wrote:

This simply highlights the short comings of cycle lanes.

Cyclists quite rightly want to flow along the cycle lane while traffic wants to turn left.
Conflict is inevitable.
Doing away with cycle lanes will result in wider roads that everyone can share. Primary for going straight, right for turning right and left for turning left or slow. Traffic merges and everything works out fine. In theory but it will never work as common sense would appear to be non-existant.

Trouble with the "it'll never work" arguement is that it works remarkably well on the roads I use and very few of them have cycle lanes. Okay, the roads are quieter here but busy roads slows down the motorists and makes it even easier for cyclists. Unless said cyclists are impatient and cut through traffic at improper times. These cyclists only have themselves to blame.

Patience is required by all commuters, regardless of mode, and that is my main point.

I must admit, personally I never have any problem not using cycle lanes, as far as I'm concerned "advisory" cycle lanes have no more value than a splash of green paint in the gutter, but to less experienced cyclists travelling relatively slowly, they are helpful refuges from traffic. Generally in London I find myself travelling at the same speed as or faster than motor traffic so have no problem sliding in and out of it but for slower riders this is not possible. There are now a huge number of inexperienced cyclists on London's roads and if Bozo is serious about a "cycling revolution" they need to be catered for....

Origamist

iPete wrote:

hmmm it was interesting, quite a big protest (i have no comparison!) had to rescue a few people from irate motorbikes and calm down the riders & i wasn't even 100% sure why I was there.

Had the GoPro hooked up but won't know till later if its any good. Probably won't upload it. I did manage to pick out Gaz & say hello, so if your reading your more than welcome to some extra footage.

What bike were you on Pete?

That's me in the bottom right of the pic - black jersey, orange piping. Thankfully, you can't see my head.

I'd hazard there were 100+ cyclists, one motoryclist got a bit agitated, but even he stopped revving his engine after 2mins.

iPete

White Allez with 1 pannier on & tri bars, wearing a bright bright yellow Planet-X SS jersy and shorts. Should have some very slow rolling footage of you.

Have to agree with Headhuunter; personally I have no issues with the roads but I turned up for the people not as experienced, especially since my office is now a mile away and many of my work colleagues, male, female, fair weathered etc etc will use this route.

gaz545

Good to meet you iPete.
Put a few faces to cyclists with cameras, and a handful i didn't get a chance to speak to. Spent a lot of time talking to the cycle task force.

navt

That's me. Dead centre. Helmet, red jersey, backpack, red Gill windbreaker.

rick_chasey

daviesee wrote:

This simply highlights the short comings of cycle lanes.

Cyclists quite rightly want to flow along the cycle lane while traffic wants to turn left.
Conflict is inevitable.
Doing away with cycle lanes will result in wider roads that everyone can share. Primary for going straight, right for turning right and left for turning left or slow. Traffic merges and everything works out fine. In theory but it will never work as common sense would appear to be non-existant.

Trouble with the "it'll never work" arguement is that it works remarkably well on the roads I use and very few of them have cycle lanes. Okay, the roads are quieter here but busy roads slows down the motorists and makes it even easier for cyclists. Unless said cyclists are impatient and cut through traffic at improper times. These cyclists only have themselves to blame.

Patience is required by all commuters, regardless of mode, and that is my main point.

*facepalm*

ndru

Rick Chasey wrote:

daviesee wrote:

This simply highlights the short comings of cycle lanes.

Cyclists quite rightly want to flow along the cycle lane while traffic wants to turn left.
Conflict is inevitable.
Doing away with cycle lanes will result in wider roads that everyone can share. Primary for going straight, right for turning right and left for turning left or slow. Traffic merges and everything works out fine. In theory but it will never work as common sense would appear to be non-existant.

Trouble with the "it'll never work" arguement is that it works remarkably well on the roads I use and very few of them have cycle lanes. Okay, the roads are quieter here but busy roads slows down the motorists and makes it even easier for cyclists. Unless said cyclists are impatient and cut through traffic at improper times. These cyclists only have themselves to blame.

Patience is required by all commuters, regardless of mode, and that is my main point.

*facepalm*

Couldn't agree more with the facepalm. It's great that experienced and fit cyclist find it easy and pleasant to navigate busy roads and mix with traffic, but I think it's time to stop being selfish. There's a lot of people who would like to cycle but don't because they are a) scared b) don't see it as convenient c) don't feel welcome by the street design. It seems that cyclist generally don't want more people to cycle and don't really want to share the road, perhaps with exception of other likeminded cyclist.

iPete

That 'Sect' thing is a bit daft IMO.

Simply put; experienced cyclists don't want to be told to "get of the f*cking road" because the council has painted a green path around some lamp posts across some side streets and certainly don't want to use said crap facilities.

p.s. I would like to swim in rapids with a bear nice presentation.

ndru

iPete wrote:

That 'Sect' thing is a bit daft IMO.

Simply put; experienced cyclists don't want to be told to "get of the f*cking road" because the council has painted a green path around some lamp posts across some side streets and certainly don't want to use said crap facilities.

p.s. I would like to swim in rapids with a bear nice presentation.

True - no one wants crappy infrastructure. But that's why we need to ask for good one, no? Cycle paths are going to be built anyway, because no one gives a damn about them and no one watches over the standards. And you will find hostile drivers no matter what - the tiny minority of drivers that make cyclist life unpleasant will never be eradicated. Dedicated cycle tracks will at least get us out of their reach - it only takes one to end a cyclist's life.

ndru

iPete wrote:

That 'Sect' thing is a bit daft IMO.

Simply put; experienced cyclists don't want to be told to "get of the f*cking road" because the council has painted a green path around some lamp posts across some side streets and certainly don't want to use said crap facilities.

p.s. I would like to swim in rapids with a bear nice presentation.

True - no one wants crappy infrastructure. But that's why we need to ask for good one, no? Cycle paths are going to be built anyway, because no one gives a damn about them and no one watches over the standards. And you will find hostile drivers no matter what - the tiny minority of drivers that make cyclist life unpleasant will never be eradicated. Dedicated cycle tracks will at least get us out of their reach - it only takes one to end a cyclist's life.

iPete

Right, watched all 25 minutes; a very good presentation.

Interesting to see the history of planning and how other countries reacted to the oil crisis!

Your completely right on the 'would you be happy for your gran to ride there' idea. My office is very big on cycling but to be honest I'm kind of happy when the less experienced cyclists don't take up the commute, especially since they'd have to deal with Elephant and castle, Blackfriars etc. The main reason I attended the flash ride.

ndru

iPete wrote:

Right, watched all 25 minutes; a very good presentation.

Interesting to see the history of planning and how other countries reacted to the oil crisis!

Your completely right on the 'would you be happy for your gran to ride there' idea. My office is very big on cycling but to be honest I'm kind of happy when the less experienced cyclists don't take up the commute, especially since they'd have to deal with Elephant and castle, Blackfriars etc. The main reason I attended the flash ride.

I think you are attributing the presentation to the wrong person. While I wholeheartedly agree with it, it was Mark Ames from ibikelondon that did it. I, on the other hand, am Andrew and my blog (which is hibernating atm) is called iamnotacyclist. However I am very glad you agree

Headhuunter

iPete wrote:

That 'Sect' thing is a bit daft IMO.

Simply put; experienced cyclists don't want to be told to "get of the f*cking road" because the council has painted a green path around some lamp posts across some side streets and certainly don't want to use said crap facilities.

p.s. I would like to swim in rapids with a bear nice presentation.

Yeah I agree, I can see that provision of excellent separated cycle lanes and facilities would get more people onto their bikes but personally I would not want motorists to think that they then had ultimate priority on the roads and that I should be on the cycle lane. Inevitably dedicated cycle lanes would become clogged with slower cyclists pootling at 5mph. Currently the highway code recommends that if you want to travel at 18mph or above on a bike you should not use cycle paths but you can be sure that motorists wouldn't see it that way. I'm also sceptical that there is any space in central London for provision of a decent cycle network, unless road space is significantly cut and space shaved off pavements. Also having been to cities across Europe which have a comprehensive network of cycle lanes, I have seen how they mostly end up as car parking spaces or places for pedestrians to stop and have a chat and generally the surfaces are not maintained as well as actual road surfaces so end up severely potholed...

rick_chasey

Headhuunter wrote:

Yeah I agree, I can see that provision of excellent separated cycle lanes and facilities would get more people onto their bikes but personally I would not want motorists to think that they then had ultimate priority on the roads and that I should be on the cycle lane. Inevitably dedicated cycle lanes would become clogged with slower cyclists pootling at 5mph. Currently the highway code recommends that if you want to travel at 18mph or above on a bike you should not use cycle paths but you can be sure that motorists wouldn't see it that way. I'm also sceptical that there is any space in central London for provision of a decent cycle network, unless road space is significantly cut and space shaved off pavements. Also having been to cities across Europe which have a comprehensive network of cycle lanes, I have seen how they mostly end up as car parking spaces or places for pedestrians to stop and have a chat and generally the surfaces are not maintained as well as actual road surfaces so end up severely potholed...

I think there's confusion here. Having proper cycling facilities wouldn't let motorists think they have priority. The laws and rules regarding cycles and cycle facilities would naturally reflect the different road structure - take a look at the Netherland's legislation on cycling and right of ways for example.

Also, i think that, given that this is a forum for keen cyclists there's an uncessary emphasis on the need to go flat out when going to work. I just don't think that, for the greater good, it's a right or desire that needs to be considered. In the same way you can't speed in your car to work, you might not be able to go fast on your bike.

This is how things should be. Relaxed, straightforward, simple. In this situation, there are no massive debates about wearing helmets, no whinges about bad drivers, dangerous driving, or anything like that.


With regard to space, there are many examples in the Nethlerands in the early '90s where there were 2 or 3 lanes of traffic or a normal 1 each way road with space for car parking. Often in these situations, a lane or car parking was removed for a full and proper seperated bicycle lane.

There's always space. It's not like the Netherlands is a country where there's a lot of space to go around.

Headhuunter

Rick Chasey wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Yeah I agree, I can see that provision of excellent separated cycle lanes and facilities would get more people onto their bikes but personally I would not want motorists to think that they then had ultimate priority on the roads and that I should be on the cycle lane. Inevitably dedicated cycle lanes would become clogged with slower cyclists pootling at 5mph. Currently the highway code recommends that if you want to travel at 18mph or above on a bike you should not use cycle paths but you can be sure that motorists wouldn't see it that way. I'm also sceptical that there is any space in central London for provision of a decent cycle network, unless road space is significantly cut and space shaved off pavements. Also having been to cities across Europe which have a comprehensive network of cycle lanes, I have seen how they mostly end up as car parking spaces or places for pedestrians to stop and have a chat and generally the surfaces are not maintained as well as actual road surfaces so end up severely potholed...

I think there's confusion here. Having proper cycling facilities wouldn't let motorists think they have priority. The laws and rules regarding cycles and cycle facilities would naturally reflect the different road structure - take a look at the Netherland's legislation on cycling and right of ways for example.

Also, i think that, given that this is a forum for keen cyclists there's an uncessary emphasis on the need to go flat out when going to work. I just don't think that, for the greater good, it's a right or desire that needs to be considered. In the same way you can't speed in your car to work, you might not be able to go fast on your bike.

This is how things should be. Relaxed, straightforward, simple. In this situation, there are no massive debates about wearing helmets, no whinges about bad drivers, dangerous driving, or anything like that.

I disagree and would expect that if a comprehensive system of cycle lanes were provided, we would get more hassle from motorists to get off the road. I have personally never experienced it, but apparently people already get shouted at to get in the cycle lane (AKA green paint in the gutter).

I don't feel that I have a right to travel all out at all times on the ride to work, I slow down if conditions dictate, but equally I don't want it to be expected that I should ride on a dedicated path at 5mph, one of the beauties of cycling across a city like London is that for speed and efficiency, 90% of the time it beats every other mode of transport hands down...

rick_chasey

Headhuunter wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Yeah I agree, I can see that provision of excellent separated cycle lanes and facilities would get more people onto their bikes but personally I would not want motorists to think that they then had ultimate priority on the roads and that I should be on the cycle lane. Inevitably dedicated cycle lanes would become clogged with slower cyclists pootling at 5mph. Currently the highway code recommends that if you want to travel at 18mph or above on a bike you should not use cycle paths but you can be sure that motorists wouldn't see it that way. I'm also sceptical that there is any space in central London for provision of a decent cycle network, unless road space is significantly cut and space shaved off pavements. Also having been to cities across Europe which have a comprehensive network of cycle lanes, I have seen how they mostly end up as car parking spaces or places for pedestrians to stop and have a chat and generally the surfaces are not maintained as well as actual road surfaces so end up severely potholed...

I think there's confusion here. Having proper cycling facilities wouldn't let motorists think they have priority. The laws and rules regarding cycles and cycle facilities would naturally reflect the different road structure - take a look at the Netherland's legislation on cycling and right of ways for example.

Also, i think that, given that this is a forum for keen cyclists there's an uncessary emphasis on the need to go flat out when going to work. I just don't think that, for the greater good, it's a right or desire that needs to be considered. In the same way you can't speed in your car to work, you might not be able to go fast on your bike.

This is how things should be. Relaxed, straightforward, simple. In this situation, there are no massive debates about wearing helmets, no whinges about bad drivers, dangerous driving, or anything like that.

I disagree and would expect that if a comprehensive system of cycle lanes were provided, we would get more hassle from motorists to get off the road. I have personally never experienced it, but apparently people already get shouted at to get in the cycle lane (AKA green paint in the gutter).

I don't feel that I have a right to travel all out at all times on the ride to work, I slow down if conditions dictate, but equally I don't want it to be expected that I should ride on a dedicated path at 5mph, one of the beauties of cycling across a city like London is that for speed and efficiency, 90% of the time it beats every other mode of transport hands down...

I don't quite understand - if there are cycling facilities, why should you be on the road?

I thought, for commuting, the reason why people were on the road was because there was no-where else?

Sure, training out in the country on your road bike is a little different, but that's not what we're (or at least me) discussing.