What is the point of cycle superhighways ?

Jay dubbleU

Just read a report of a second cyclist killed in London at the same junction within three weeks. As a non Londoner I don't see the point of the Cycle Superhighways. Apart from painting a blue strip on the road what legislation is there to enforce them? I've heard on here that they get blocked by parked vehicles and there doesn't seem to be any restriction on vehicles using them. Are they a pointless publicity exercise or do they in fact make cycling more dangerous by creating a false sense of security ?

hfidgen

Shit! I rode straight past the police cars on Friday without a thought - I always go up and over the flyover though, considerably safer than that roundabout IMO.

SuperHighways are in general a good idea, but I think there are 2 problems. First, some riders seem to think that blue paint protects them and lose all common sense in terms of shoulder checking and stopping at junctions. Second, the blue paint sometimes takes you into danger, rather than away from it.

Bow roundabout is the glaring example of this - the flyover is so much better, both ways. All you have to watch is how you merge with the traffic the other end - but if you're doing 25mph and taking up the lane, all the cars I've seen are very respectful.

jonny_trousers

I must admit I've never really seen the point in them. I don't get to use them that much on my commute, but when I do cars will still drive very close to the edge of them or indeed in them. They scare the sh*t out of me too when it's damp and I have to enter one at speed and from an angle.

veronese68

They do seem rather pointless. I don't normally use them as my commute doesn't go into town. Friday night I went into town (on a motorbike) and was riding alongside one and was thinking how badly executed it was. It's very hard to get it right I'm sure, but the blue lane is not given any priority. There are times when it suddenly narrows, or disappears altogether. If you're going to call it a Cycle Superhighway it implies some sort of priority to the cyclists. As it is it's just another ill-conceived cycle lane, painted blue.

Jay dubbleU

Veronese68 wrote:

They do seem rather pointless. I don't normally use them as my commute doesn't go into town. Friday night I went into town (on a motorbike) and was riding alongside one and was thinking how badly executed it was. It's very hard to get it right I'm sure, but the blue lane is not given any priority. There are times when it suddenly narrows, or disappears altogether. If you're going to call it a Cycle Superhighway it implies some sort of priority to the cyclists. As it is it's just another ill-conceived cycle lane, painted blue.

Never used one myself but that's the impression I get - don't see how they can work unless there is some kind of enforcement against use by non cycling traffic

se-po

In Elephant & Castle they designed the superhighway to avoid the roundabout, diverting cyclists to less busy roads.
Of course is slower, but if you're not in a hurry and a casual cyclist that diversion is quite useful.

deptfordmarmoset

The cycle superhighway that they've put around the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix circuit looks pretty good to me. It's a shame that the cars won't stay out of it. CS2 is pretty much the same.

TheStone

When they were putting them in, it did seem a totally waste of time and money.
The real plus side was that it forced them to tarmac the whole route (CS7), which was in a bad state.

Now, I don't think they're so bad. More people are riding and I do think it gives cyclists and drivers a small clue as to where the division should be. It's not ideal. Too many breaks, random parking bays, bus stops etc, but better than nothing. It could be improved. Should be a solid line that cars are not allowed in and junctions need to be clearer.

There's not space for anything more and I'm not convinced partitions improve things (see Southwark Bridge)

rick_chasey

The surface feels super fast on the bike in the little experience I have riding on it.

notsoblue

I only have experience of CS8, but I think CSHs are brilliant. On fast, wide sections of the embankment cars do stay out of it. Also, its public recognition by TFL that cyclists do deserve to be on the road just as much as motorists do. The combination of cyclists riding in the same lane, and on a bright blue background makes us very visible and makes it obvious to other road users that we aren't a tiny minority.

rjsterry

se-po wrote:

In Elephant & Castle they designed the superhighway to avoid the roundabout, diverting cyclists to less busy roads.
Of course is slower, but if you're not in a hurry and a casual cyclist that diversion is quite useful.

This bit does actually work very well. For the less experienced slower cyclist there's a nice quiet route that avoids the busy junction and takes you up to Southwark Bridge, or for those with more confidence, you can whizz on over E&C roundabouts. Not sure there are equivalent alternative routes around other gyratories that could be combined into a 'quiet routes'.

Bassjunkieuk

notsoblue wrote:

I only have experience of CS8, but I think CSHs are brilliant. On fast, wide sections of the embankment cars do stay out of it. Also, its public recognition by TFL that cyclists do deserve to be on the road just as much as motorists do. The combination of cyclists riding in the same lane, and on a bright blue background makes us very visible and makes it obvious to other road users that we aren't a tiny minority.

If you've only ridden the section of CS8 on Embankment it may explain why you think they are brilliant. That section is probably one of the better executed pieces as the width of the road meant they did have the space (and balls) to take away some from the motorised traffic and give (or at least paint it blue...) to the cyclists.

My problem with them is that elsewhere they are really nothing more then your standard (under)sized bike lane with a new lick of paint. Drivers then get the idea you are ONLY allowed in the blue lane as soon as you leave it your in "their space".

They also give cyclists a false sense of security and lead them into exactly the places you aren't meant to go, this is rather bad as considering they are designed for new/novice cyclists they may not always realize the problem of queueing up in the lovely blue CS lane alongside a HGV. I think the cycle instructor I was chatting with on the Tour Du Danger put it quite well when he talked about the CS2/Bow R/b lane - "It basically wants you to ride in the same position I'd advise my students to avoid like the plague!"

roger_merriman

TFL have done a good job with the embankment CS8.

but else where as others have said they are (at least ones i've seen) back to the normal waste of time.

iPete

Wasn't CS8 originally meant to go beyond Parliament Square [I could be mistaken]? I'll agree its great, although I never rode it pre-highway but it sounds like they gave up when it truly got difficult.

Origamist

Cycle Superhighways were instigated after various surveys and on the ground observation. Their purpose was to make cycling on arterial routes easier. This might not sound like a huge step, but traditionally cycle lanes and certainly routes wended their way along back streets and were under used. This led to an increase in the number of cyclists using A- roads in the 2000s.

The decision to tackle these major thoroughfares and reduce road danger was bold, but the implementation was always going to be problematic.

Bassjunkieuk

They where also quite sneaky launching CS7 on already fairly popular route (which was also reasonably easy to join from the A23 corridor....) and hail it a "success" when all it really did was just pull in a few riders (like myself) who may have used alternative routes to get to the same end points. I think I was already using the A24 before the CS went in purely because it was more popular with other riders and so gave richer pickings for SCRing ;-)

Origamist

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

They where also quite sneaky launching CS7 on already fairly popular route (which was also reasonably easy to join from the A23 corridor....) and hail it a "success" when all it really did was just pull in a few riders (like myself) who may have used alternative routes to get to the same end points. I think I was already using the A24 before the CS went in purely because it was more popular with other riders and so gave richer pickings for SCRing ;-)

Quite. CS7 was piggybacking on the increased cycle flows on the route that had been taking place for years. Bus lanes on part of the route helped, but it was an obvious choice for a pilot.

The issue of "route migration" is difficult - TFL are keen to promote the idea that it is ostensibly new cyclists using these corridors and not the result of mass rider migration from other nearby routes that is leading to the increased number of cyclists on CSs.

Some of the other routes earmarked for CSs are currently less cycle friendly and they will pose more problems for traffic planners and engineers.

W1

notsoblue wrote:

I only have experience of CS8, but I think CSHs are brilliant. On fast, wide sections of the embankment cars do stay out of it. Also, its public recognition by TFL that cyclists do deserve to be on the road just as much as motorists do. The combination of cyclists riding in the same lane, and on a bright blue background makes us very visible and makes it obvious to other road users that we aren't a tiny minority.

I agree with that - although I have used CS7 once and was less impressed than I am with CS8.

One other additional factor to mention - safety in numbers. CS8 seems a lot busier than that stretch seemed to be pre CS. The more cyclists, the better for all of us (within reason - Nodderclypse excluded).

notsoblue

W1 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

I only have experience of CS8, but I think CSHs are brilliant. On fast, wide sections of the embankment cars do stay out of it. Also, its public recognition by TFL that cyclists do deserve to be on the road just as much as motorists do. The combination of cyclists riding in the same lane, and on a bright blue background makes us very visible and makes it obvious to other road users that we aren't a tiny minority.

I agree with that - although I have used CS7 once and was less impressed than I am with CS8.

One other additional factor to mention - safety in numbers. CS8 seems a lot busier than that stretch seemed to be pre CS. The more cyclists, the better for all of us (within reason - Nodderclypse excluded).

Yeah, I totally agree with that. And I really think this is because when drivers see isolated riders they think they don't belong on roads made for cars and as such will take less care around them (or even go so far as voicing or honking their annoyance at being held up).

My sister was knocked off her bike on Hammersmith gyratory this weekend. She's pretty bruised and a little shaken up, but otherwise fine, and will be right back on the bike. It was as the lights turned green under the bypass where Fulham Road meets the junction, and a car basically just pushed her to the side as it tried to overtake on the bend at low speed. The driver didn't stop and just drove off. Theres an ASL at that junction, but its pretty badly marked and not many people use it. If there had been a CSH style blue ASL with a cycle lane leading into the lane, then perhaps this may not have happened. The way the junction is laid out now theres simply no obvious provision for cyclists. When I use it I have to assertively take the lane. Cyclists who don't risk the above happening to them.

roger_merriman

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"

clearly the numbers are going to managed by TFL.

do I really care, not really.

as others have said it was always going to be a big ask.

W1

As always with these things, there has to be a balance of cost/space/safety/utilisation. These lanes, whilst not perfect, are a significant step up in provision for cyclists, and the intent should be applauded. The execution - well, in my experience, it's good, but I can appreciate that isn't universal.

The thing is, I'm not sure ever we could all agree what would be "perfect" for cyclists. Even when they close the roads for bikes (L2B, Skyride), it's far from perfect - all those bloody cyclists get in the way!

Bassjunkieuk

I've been clipped by the wing mirror of a van whilst in one of the bright blue ASL's near Aldgate, all because the driver was an impatient twunt who didn't want to wait in the queue like the other drivers. Didn't stop (tbh I doubt he even realized he'd hit me) and I remained upright as I'd only just pushed off for the green, just took a knock on my shoulder!

Was one of the times I was thankful I use the helmet cam as I contacted his employer with the footage and got it dealt with properly :-)

notsoblue

W1 wrote:

The thing is, I'm not sure ever we could all agree what would be "perfect" for cyclists. Even when they close the roads for bikes (L2B, Skyride), it's far from perfect - all those bloody cyclists get in the way!

I'm in two minds about the Skyride. Its a nice day out for the family, but I always think its a shame that for loads of people there its only time they'd even consider riding on roads with their kids at all, let alone in central London.

el_presidente

They are a publically subsidised advert for Barclays.

Bassjunkieuk

notsoblue wrote:

W1 wrote:

The thing is, I'm not sure ever we could all agree what would be "perfect" for cyclists. Even when they close the roads for bikes (L2B, Skyride), it's far from perfect - all those bloody cyclists get in the way!

I'm in two minds about the Skyride. Its a nice day out for the family, but I always think its a shame that for loads of people there its only time they'd even consider riding on roads with their kids at all, let alone in central London.

I don't think closed road events such as the Skyrides can be used as an example, yes they are great for showing a lot of people have bikes and can ride. I also have no doubt that many are attending as it gives them a chance to ride on roads free from motorised traffic and take in some of the sights in their local city. When I went this year I took along 5 kids; 3 of my own (10,8 and 7) and 2 of their cousins (16 & 14) and we did ride from the car park to the main start point. I won't lie that I was feeling rather nervous but a combination of it being Sunday and knowing the quieter roads to use meant we got there relatively easily with me riding at the back to block any ejits, the older pair at the front and me yelling instructions to the group :-)

Ideally cycling facilities should allow for more experienced/quicker riders to co-exist with new/slower riders. Even if it's a case of having to wait for a safe place to overtake (think Cable Street CS...) Some of the video's I've seen of the Dutch cycle networks, including a "proper" cycle superhighway - 4.5 miles of segregated cycle path linking 2 towns, does have me wanting to emigrate but I understand that London's existing street layout isn't ideally suited to giving up the space needed to implement such a system here. Such a terrible shame as one of them showed a school run which didn't have a single 4x4 in sight :-)

deptfordmarmoset

For anyone who's ridden the CS2 and knows what a dog's dinner of a CSH it is, there's a draft letter in this link put together by LCC. http://lcc.org.uk/pages/bow-roundabout

Personally, I'm tempted to ''invite'' BJ to ride from the Olympics site to City Hall, using CS2, with me so that he knows exactly what the problems are. The very worst scenario would be that we need to re-elect a London mayor...

ketsbaia

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

The very worst scenario would be that we need to re-elect a London mayor...

A price worth paying for cycling safety as I'm sure Boris would agree.

WRT the CSH initiative, it was designed to get more people cycling by making it easier for them to work out a route into the centre of town and show that it was 'easy' to do, TfL's research suggesting one of the things people were put off by was the fact it was too difficult to work out how to get into town ( :roll: ). Plenty of cycling lobby groups were vocal at the time about why they weren't going to be particularly effective in ensuring safety, but these concerns were brushed aside as TfL needed to look like it was serious about its walking and cycling agenda. Having ridden up CS7 from Clapham Common to Southwark the other day, I can see why the lobbyists objected.

In theory, the idea was a laudable one, but in practice, most motorists were always going to see them as 'where cyclists should be' and not an area that shouldn't be encroached into either. Throw in the slippery paintwork and the myriad manhole covers and, in wet weather, you're left with a fairly hazardous route that offers you no more protection from passing traffic than a Herman's safety wing. In many cases, considerably less.

The only way they'd ever be made safe is by making them wider, slightly more grippy and, crucially, as sacrosanct as bus lanes (in terms of cameras being present and tickets being issued).

Otherwise it's just a bit of blue paint near the gutter.

I agree CS8 is quite nice because the surface is smooth and aids road rolling, but apart from that and showing you how to get from one bit of London to another by bike, it's otherwise fairly pointless.

mtb-idle

i've been commuting since before they were there and although they will never be perfect it is much better now in terms of other traffic awareness.

Yes you get the odd idiot but you will get that whatever you do.

They work for me.