London Cycle Super Corridor

rjsterry

Surprised nobody's picked this up yet, but apparently plans are afoot to connect up the inward ends of all the CS's with one major cycling corridor running along Viccy Embankment from roughly Parliament Square to Tower Gateway. Sounds like a good idea to solve the problem that the current CS's just dump you in Zone 1 with it's very patchy infrastructure. According to the article in last night's Standard, the success of the Olympic traffic management has given people the confidence to think that something similar might be possible to provide for cyclists during commuting hours, without the problem of cycle lanes sitting empty at other times.

More here.

Koncordski

The amount of hate and bigotry in the comments section is breathtaking, there are however some very reasoned responses with accident rates and figures. Get a cup of tea and a biscuit and enjoy.....

I have to say though, this was front page of the standard with an editorial in the paper backing it up. Quite brave of them and it simply wouldn't have been this supportive a year ago. Sooner or later someone will actually commission a count of cyclists between 7am an 9am along embankment, that will surprise a lot of people. There are so many bikes, we deserve to get better share of the space.

il_principe

On Weds I had dinner & drinks with someone who works at TFL in the road planning dept. Apparently TFL apply economic weighting to vehicles etc. Private cars are given a high economic weighting than cyclists - therefore are deemed more important when it comes to share of road space, spend etc. I could hardly believe my ears. He did admit that they are behind the times as an org and in his opinion badly need people who actually get cycling. I asked if he did/would ever cycle in London. His answer: "No way, it's far too dangerous."

Very depressing.

rjsterry

Il Principe wrote:

On Weds I had dinner & drinks with someone who works at TFL in the road planning dept. Apparently TFL apply economic weighting to vehicles etc. Private cars are given a high economic weighting than cyclists - therefore are deemed more important when it comes to share of road space, spend etc. I could hardly believe my ears. He did admit that they are behind the times as an org and in his opinion badly need people who actually get cycling. I asked if he did/would ever cycle in London. His answer: "No way, it's far too dangerous."

Very depressing.

Green Brompton

Depressing indeed. Everyone at my work says they wouldn't ride in London as it's too dangerous and scary. I have to admit, it was never a thought I had when taking up cycling, all I cared about was turning up to work looking a state! I think you have to have a certain mental attitude to deal with cycling in the city.

Anyway, a lot needs to be done about the perception of riding in London, but even the BR forum is crammed full of near misses (and not so near!) by experienced city riders, it's not a leisurely country ride, you have to be 100% on the ball and very aware of what drivers, peds and cyclists are doing around you at all times.

Cycle lanes make you feel safer, and cars usually respect your road space when there is one. Car drivers, on the other hand, probably don't experience the same feeling as cyclists, so giving us priority in sharing road space should be a priority, in my opinion...

Kieran_Burns

It's not exactly fair to say I have a leisurely country ride every day (admittedly it IS all country / village lanes with one 2 mile stretch of A road) but when the closing speed of traffic is more than 3 times your own speed, it can be just as dangerous.

I do have my fair share of impatient drivers who have to slow from 60 to get past me (and sometimes they don't... the WHUMP of a car passing at >60mph when you have little or no warning can be enough to topple you).

I also have more than enough cars over-taking others TOWARDS me and not caring that I'm being put in huge amounts of danger. Total closing speed? Probably in the region of 90mph

cookeeemonster

Il Principe wrote:

On Weds I had dinner & drinks with someone who works at TFL in the road planning dept. Apparently TFL apply economic weighting to vehicles etc. Private cars are given a high economic weighting than cyclists - therefore are deemed more important when it comes to share of road space, spend etc. I could hardly believe my ears. He did admit that they are behind the times as an org and in his opinion badly need people who actually get cycling. I asked if he did/would ever cycle in London. His answer: "No way, it's far too dangerous."

Very depressing.

So how do they tally up their economic weighting with the highway code? As in, all road users are created equal (and so on). Pretty outrageous really.

And...people driving to work by car in london must be a tiny proportion compared to those using public transport and so on, yet tfl spend huge amounts of time and money placating them, why?!!??!

As for the comments section on the standard article, it's pretty even compared to a year or two ago. Back then it was all anti cyclist, now there's a fair amount of pro cycling too (or balanced views)

Always remember the standard was part of the daily mail group until recently so you're not talking with an average londoner, you're talking with a daily mail reader (below average in every sense)

The Rookie

Il Principe wrote:

Private cars are given a high economic weighting than cyclists - therefore are deemed more important when it comes to share of road space, spend etc. I asked if he did/would ever cycle in London. His answer: "No way, it's far too dangerous."

Very depressing.

Logical question - So that person is suddenly more valuable the instant they are scared off their bike and into their car?

My commute is pretty much like KB's and I have the same concerns as him.

il_principe

CookeeeMonster wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

On Weds I had dinner & drinks with someone who works at TFL in the road planning dept. Apparently TFL apply economic weighting to vehicles etc. Private cars are given a high economic weighting than cyclists - therefore are deemed more important when it comes to share of road space, spend etc. I could hardly believe my ears. He did admit that they are behind the times as an org and in his opinion badly need people who actually get cycling. I asked if he did/would ever cycle in London. His answer: "No way, it's far too dangerous."

Very depressing.

So how do they tally up their economic weighting with the highway code? As in, all road users are created equal (and so on). Pretty outrageous really.

God knows. HGV's are given an even higher weighting... go figure. IMHO TFL should focus more on making London a pleasant place for people... but car is king.

MrSweary

Depressing to hear TfL thinking but entirely unsurprising.

I'm not sure why people think riding in London is so dangerous though. I'd rather commute here than on rural roads any day of the week.

sketchley

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor ... 19904.html

Greg T

watermanV15 wrote:

A cycling tax is long overdue Boris. All these bikes on the road paying nothing at the moment.
The money might help put some flat tarmac on the streets of London.
The capitals streets and roads are a disgrace They were probably in better condition when the romans were in town.

Watermanv15 earlier today

greg66_tri_v2.0

Il Principe wrote:

CookeeeMonster wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

On Weds I had dinner & drinks with someone who works at TFL in the road planning dept. Apparently TFL apply economic weighting to vehicles etc. Private cars are given a high economic weighting than cyclists - therefore are deemed more important when it comes to share of road space, spend etc. I could hardly believe my ears. He did admit that they are behind the times as an org and in his opinion badly need people who actually get cycling. I asked if he did/would ever cycle in London. His answer: "No way, it's far too dangerous."

Very depressing.

So how do they tally up their economic weighting with the highway code? As in, all road users are created equal (and so on). Pretty outrageous really.

God knows. HGV's are given an even higher weighting... go figure. IMHO TFL should focus more on making London a pleasant place for people... but car is king.

Cars may well be higher up the pecking order than bikes, but I'd bet they are small fry in weighting terms compared to commercial vehicles of pretty much any description. The absolute mutha-fcuker T Rex in any TFL food chain will inevitably be a bus. I am fairly sure that if TFL had its way, buses would be allowed to drive like emergency vehicles with their lights on, and force other vehicles out of their way.

rjsterry

Now, now, Greg. The lower orders need to get to work too.

I don't think commuting by car is the issue - relatively few do it - it's commercial vehicles that account for most of it. Strikes me that trying to allocate an economic value to each road user based solely on their mode of transport is so inaccurate as to be meaningless. One might as well prioritise on the basis of paint colour - oh f***, that puts me with the white vans.

cookeeemonster

rjsterry wrote:

One might as well prioritise on the basis of paint colour - oh f***, that puts me with the white vans.

YAY!!!!!!! That puts me with the black cabs - I'm a f*cking king, now get outta ma way!!!!! :P

mtb-idle

watermanV15 wrote:

A cycling tax is long overdue Boris. All these bikes on the road paying nothing at the moment.
The money might help put some flat tarmac on the streets of London.
The capitals streets and roads are a disgrace They were probably in better condition when the romans were in town.

Hey guess what watermanV15, it ain't the bikes that are causing the poor state of repair of the roads.

chilling

I'd say the school run accounts for a lot of the rush hour traffic too. The school holidays are noticeable by the reduction in traffic.

Headhuunter

Kieran_Burns wrote:

It's not exactly fair to say I have a leisurely country ride every day (admittedly it IS all country / village lanes with one 2 mile stretch of A road) but when the closing speed of traffic is more than 3 times your own speed, it can be just as dangerous.

I do have my fair share of impatient drivers who have to slow from 60 to get past me (and sometimes they don't... the WHUMP of a car passing at >60mph when you have little or no warning can be enough to topple you).

I also have more than enough cars over-taking others TOWARDS me and not caring that I'm being put in huge amounts of danger. Total closing speed? Probably in the region of 90mph

I agree, I've experienced a lot of dangerous driving out in the country, probably more as a percentage of the number of cars out there than in London. As you say, drivers speed past VERY close, overtake towards you from the opposite direction etc etc. I've had some of my closest calls out cycling in rural areas. The ironic thing is that you'll get yummy mummy in the 4x4 speeding past on a narrow lane with barely a hairs breadth of space, then about 5 mins later you'll see her slow and carefully pass a horse rider with the utmost courtesy.... I always find it bizarre that horses are given so much respect by motorists in the country but cyclists are often nearly mown down...

rjsterry

Headhuunter wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

It's not exactly fair to say I have a leisurely country ride every day (admittedly it IS all country / village lanes with one 2 mile stretch of A road) but when the closing speed of traffic is more than 3 times your own speed, it can be just as dangerous.

I do have my fair share of impatient drivers who have to slow from 60 to get past me (and sometimes they don't... the WHUMP of a car passing at >60mph when you have little or no warning can be enough to topple you).

I also have more than enough cars over-taking others TOWARDS me and not caring that I'm being put in huge amounts of danger. Total closing speed? Probably in the region of 90mph

I agree, I've experienced a lot of dangerous driving out in the country, probably more as a percentage of the number of cars out there than in London. As you say, drivers speed past VERY close, overtake towards you from the opposite direction etc etc. I've had some of my closest calls out cycling in rural areas. The ironic thing is that you'll get yummy mummy in the 4x4 speeding past on a narrow lane with barely a hairs breadth of space, then about 5 mins later you'll see her slow and carefully pass a horse rider with the utmost courtesy.... I always find it bizarre that horses are given so much respect by motorists in the country but cyclists are often nearly mown down...

It's pretty straightforward: they can do a lot more damage than a bike, weighing 400-500kg without a rider, and if spooked, are very unpredictable. If one rears up and puts its feet through your windscreen, there's a good chance you won't get out of the car. We are less of a threat.

Greg T

Headhuunter wrote:

I always find it bizarre that horses are given so much respect by motorists in the country but cyclists are often nearly mown down...

Bloody horse riders should be made to pass a driving test, be registered and pay road tax....

meanredspider

I have very few problems with cars mostly because I hardly see any. There's the occasional idiot (normally a farmer in a crewcab) but mostly there's loads of respect. There's no lights to queue at, nowhere to be left-hooked and almost nowhere to have someone pull out on you. And, if I see a yummy mummy, it's likely that she's on a horse (I give horses a lot of respect on my bike..). Most of my hazards come from the road surface.