What infrastructure improvements would you really like?

notsoblue

I'd like to get rid of all cycle paths that lead nowhere. The whole country is littered with useless bits of tarmac that exist for only a short distance and then just disappear, or that require cyclists to give way to every other road user every 20 yards. In some situations, riding on cycle specific infrastructure is like riding on an obstacle course. Its a terrible waste of money and building them achieves nothing other than a tick in a box.

I'd replace all of these with cycle lanes or segregated paths that get people where they want to go quickly and safely on continuous infrastructure that links up to form a proper network.

Headhuunter

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

All this mayoral campaigning stuff together with the cycling lobbying groups who have been emailing me recently got me thinking about what changes to cycling infrastructure in my city I would really like to see, and it's not the Dutch system.

I've mentioned before how lucky I am that I don't ride during ordinary commuting hours, but on the rare occasions that I do, I find myself despising the vast majority of my fellow cyclists. I was heading up to Regent's Park to do a few laps at 5:30 last night and the sheer number of absolute bell-ends on bikes was staggering. I now totally get why you lot get so wound up about RLJers. It made me think about paraphrasing Chris Rock: I love cyclists, but I hate people on bikes (and it's no wonder many motorists do too given what I see during rush hour). Anyway, my point is, being corralled into bicycle only lanes with this group of utter retards fills me with horror, not to mention that I actually like to be able to ride at around 20mph, which would be impossible in such lanes. And if I was then to ride among the cars instead, certain drivers would, perhaps quite understandably, think I had a bloody cheek getting in their way seeing as I now had a special place created just for me and my two-wheeled friends. Which gets me back to my point: what would you realistically like? For me...

I would like at least the first few feet of road from the curb to be properly and well maintained. I actually prefer to ride nearer the curb than in primary. I make sure I'm visible, sure, but I don't want to antagonise the already aggressive motorists hell-bent on getting past me further by holding them up, but the road surface is at its absolute worst where cyclists tend to ride. Fine utility companies who do not return road surface they have dug up to being millpond smooth. Fill in potholes within a reasonable length of time of being notified of them, and not with that temporary crap that lasts about a week (I'm looking at you, council in charge of Waterloo Bridge northbound)! That Addison Lee bloke gets upset about cyclists weaving left and right: they can't bloody help it given the state of many of the roads out there!

Similarly, I would like all metal drain covers to be coated with something grippy. That can't be hard can it?

ASLs that motorists know they will be fined for entering and are a little longer than at present, to afford cyclists a quicker getaway at the green light.

I never have to tackle those horrible junctions where people have been seriously injured or killed recently, so I don't know about the best solution, but perhaps segregated cycle lanes for those small stretches might be an idea.

Anyway, your thoughts?

Agree with a lot of this. Am not a fan of walled off cycle lanes for the reasons you give. You raise a good point about utility companies and the state they leave the roads in with sunken channels across otherwise smooth roads which you end up plunging into...

Headhuunter

Rick Chasey wrote:

Two lane cycle lanes in both directions on all road.

One for pootlers - one for people in lycra / going over 20mph.

I doubt that would be enforcable, you'd soon end up with people pootling side by side having a chat, blocking the way for faster riders. They would probably single out if you shouted that you were approaching but by that time you would have had to have slowed down anyway...

rick_chasey

Headhuunter wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Two lane cycle lanes in both directions on all road.

One for pootlers - one for people in lycra / going over 20mph.

I doubt that would be enforcable, you'd soon end up with people pootling side by side having a chat, blocking the way for faster riders. They would probably single out if you shouted that you were approaching but by that time you would have had to have slowed down anyway...

Ah, but my lanes would be 4m wide each .

---

If I was being serious I'd like the rule changes re-cyclists to match those of Holland and Denmark - then you'd be able to sort out some proper infrastructure - but that's not gonna happen, I've done it to death before, and a few people on here might actually physically kill me if I start going on about it again.

MonkeyMonster

I'm noticing more and more railings having been taken down - nice to know i have an exit strategy in an emergency.

rick_chasey

MonkeyMonster wrote:

I'm noticing more and more railings having been taken down - nice to know i have an exit strategy in an emergency.

They've done that for that very reason I believe. Too many people on bicycles getting crushed up against them.

Gizmo_

Riding up through Epping Forest the other day I noticed there are a number of stupid little diversions onto the pavement, which is only about a foot wide and EVEN worse surfaced than the road... e.g. http://g.co/maps/fgvw8

It'd be difficult to slot into that without swinging out into the road first - how can that conceivably be deemed 'safe'?

sfichele

Gizmo_ wrote:

Riding up through Epping Forest the other day I noticed there are a number of stupid little diversions onto the pavement, which is only about a foot wide and EVEN worse surfaced than the road... e.g. http://g.co/maps/fgvw8

It'd be difficult to slot into that without swinging out into the road first - how can that conceivably be deemed 'safe'?

Truly outstanding. More of that please.

or better still administer a massive beating to whoever thought that was a good idea.

Initialised

Headhuunter wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Two lane cycle lanes in both directions on all road.

One for pootlers - one for people in lycra / going over 20mph.

I doubt that would be enforcable, you'd soon end up with people pootling side by side having a chat, blocking the way for faster riders. They would probably single out if you shouted that you were approaching but by that time you would have had to have slowed down anyway...

We have that down Scotswood Road, segregated lane on the pavement and decent sized cycle lanes on both sides of the road, keeps the nodders/pootlers out of the way. TBH they should just make the road wider and have it as two cycles lanes (or one double width) and it would help if there weren't pinch points but it was a reasonably good example of cycle infrastructure at least between Condercum Road and the A184, is a bit ropey between Condercum and Scotswood bridge, no markings on the road and wide but ambiguously legal paths at either side. Shame they went and spioled it at the lights at the Condercum Road exit by squeezing out the cycle lane with an totally unnecessary traffic island between the second and right hand turn lanes without setting back the junction or providing an alternative high speed (I'm usually approaching 30mph there). So it was good but some f*ckwit on the council went and ruined it.



@Mr Sworld: a dog user is someone who enjoys their dog, this may occur in private or in areas used by others. Train it before it gets run over

sfichele

Article in the Times, on the cyclesafe section:

Safe cycling to be made law in Wales