So whaddya think of Boris's new cycle revolution?

cookeeemonster

looks pretty promising to me: http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Cycling%20Vision%20GLA%20template%20FINAL.pdf

http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/game-change-for-cycling-boris-johnson.html

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/truly-a-cycling-revolution-boris-launches-15-miles-of-segregated-bike-lanes-from-east-to-west-across-the-city-8524002.html

Regarding the embankment...at first I didn't look properly and assumed they would be a cycle lane on each side of the road but no, its a 2 way cycle lane...which gave me shivers down the spine due to my hatred of cable st when busy...but looking again, its definately a fair bit wider - what do you think? Does it look wide enough for overtaking?

All good stuff though, hope they make a start soon!

pitchshifter

CookeeeMonster wrote:

Regarding the embankment...at first I didn't look properly and assumed they would be a cycle lane on each side of the road but no, its a 2 way cycle lane...which gave me shivers down the spine due to my hatred of cable st when busy...but looking again, its definitely a fair bit wider - what do you think? Does it look wide enough for overtaking?

All good stuff though, hope they make a start soon!

The only problem with embankment is the buses that park up on the left hand side. Other than that there really isn't anything wrong with it. There is plenty of room so I just don't understand the point of the segregation. I don't believe the scale of the video either, it looks wide but I doubt it will be twice the width of CS8. I regularly veer out of the lane due to congestion or people just not looking before pulling out to go around someone. Instead of the road I now have a kerb to deal with.

It looks like a "get the cyclist out of the way brief" to me..

cookeeemonster

pitchshifter wrote:

CookeeeMonster wrote:

Regarding the embankment...at first I didn't look properly and assumed they would be a cycle lane on each side of the road but no, its a 2 way cycle lane...which gave me shivers down the spine due to my hatred of cable st when busy...but looking again, its definitely a fair bit wider - what do you think? Does it look wide enough for overtaking?

All good stuff though, hope they make a start soon!

It looks like a "get the cyclist out of the way brief" to me..

its definitely aimed at the sort of people who dont currently cycle - people who will be wearing normal clothes and be going slow...but I just hope it's also usable by people who want to go a bit faster

notsoblue

First impressions are really good. I know it would *definitely* get more people on bikes. It would mean the embankment would be less of a SCR racetrack, but I think thats a price worth paying.

The only downside I think is that bikes would be tolerated a lot less on roads that looked like the proposed Victoria Embankment picture. So you'd kinda feel forced to use the cycle lane, and that wouldn't really suit people who like to ride over 18mph.

spen666

CookeeeMonster wrote:

....
its definitely aimed at the sort of people who dont currently cycle - people who will be wearing normal clothes and be going slow...but I just hope it's also usable by people who want to go a bit faster

That last point is my concern. If it slows us down to the speed of the slowest cyclist, then many journeys from the suburbs will become unviable timewise

cookeeemonster

spen666 wrote:

CookeeeMonster wrote:

....
its definitely aimed at the sort of people who dont currently cycle - people who will be wearing normal clothes and be going slow...but I just hope it's also usable by people who want to go a bit faster

That last point is my concern. If it slows us down to the speed of the slowest cyclist, then many journeys from the suburbs will become unviable timewise

that's my main concern. They do mention this new super route from white city to barking and I wonder if they are going to actually change the current godawful cs3 to barking bit? - constant stop starting to give way to everyone else and the surface is pretty crappy too...as yet another puncture today proved (basically it never gets sweeped past the inner london bit and so broken glass doesn't get cleared away...except by my puncture resistant tyre...)

Will just have to wait and see though...

tgotb

Given the amount of broken glass that collects along the Victoria Embankment route, not having the ability to move out to avoid it could be a major issue. I'd also be concerned about how often it gets swept.

Personally I'd prefer a lane down each side, Millbank-style, but then I'm not the target audience. I also wish they'd consider extending the operating hours of the existing lanes. At 7pm, when the evening rush hour is still in full flow, CS8 suddenly becomes a rat run for motorbikes and black cabs; I've been *undertaken* along there by high speed motorbikes on more than one occasion, and it's only a matter of time before one of them causes a serious accident. I wrote to TFL about this, and was told that they couldn't extend the hours as they needed to "consider the needs of all road users, not just cyclists"...

willy b

An Ignorant Driver wrote:

Perhaps now London cyclists can be forced to get a licence and sit a cycling test. Ignorant bunch of t@ssers who are a danger to pedestrians.

I read the comments, sorry.

Overall looks very promising and a great step in the right direction! So Embankment might be a little slower for normal cyclists, price worth paying i'd say!

chilling

One day we will get blue tarmac in North London.

iPete

Well, I went to the flash rides and early protest ride so am I happy? Kind of.

It is built for the majority and not the Lycra louts like myself but it is a step in the right direction. I've ridden with inexperienced riders down there and it is a bit hairy at times, the biggest issue being the parked cars and busses. Take them out and there is little need for a full blown segregated lane.

Saying that, it'll probably be quicker to casually cycle down a segregated lane than hammer it down only to get stuck in traffic daily.

notsoblue

An article on Andrew Gilligan, the new Cycling Czar:
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/lon ... 24050.html

This actually looks quite promising...

cookeeemonster

iPete wrote:

Saying that, it'll probably be quicker to casually cycle down a segregated lane than hammer it down only to get stuck in traffic daily.

yeah I would hope so. There's a fair few sets of traffic lights that hold up normal traffic that needn't hold up a segregated cycle lane...so fingers crossed!!

I'll probably be working elsewhere and not using it anyway by the time it gets built

rjsterry

I'm torn: I can see that this is good for other cyclists, but I'm not sure what it'll do for me. I want to like this, but cant help but worry that it'll lead to being increased aggro from those that consider the roads to be *theirs* because they drive a taxed vehicle. I've already had 2 or 3 incidents of verbal abuse this year from such people, and further segregation can only reinforce these knuckledraggers' misguided views. Part of the benefit of having lots of cyclists on the road is that motorists are forced (to some extent) to drive more considerately, which promotes a better environment for everyone, including pedestrians. Such explicit segregation seems to be heading back to outdated ideas of keeping motor traffic flowing at 30mph+ at all costs.
Also, given that cyclists can already fill a lane on Millbank at peak times, and they are hoping this will increase cycle use, no I don't think the segregated lane is big enough.

rjsterry

This jumped out at me, and has always struck me as one of the problems with segregated lanes on major routes.

With the proviso that nothing must reduce cyclists’ right to use any road, we favour segregation. Most main roads in London are, however, also bus routes, with frequent bus stops and a far denser service than in, say, Amsterdam. The cycle lane would have to go between the bus and the pavement. Everybody getting off or on a bus would step straight into the lane, risking being hit by a cyclist

Anyone who occasionally rides up Royal College Street can see what the problem is, and that is a relatively quiet road with a handful of bus routes. Can't see a way around this.

jonomc4

I have tried to cycle along the embankment when it was busy and it was a total nightmare - I reckon I averaged about 2mph - I ended up having to cycle on the path in the middle which meant stopping every few meters for pedestrians trying to cross - the embankment to me seems like a great idea!

Basically for all the moaning about Boris - this is the first time significant money and political will is being focused on bikes and I say good on him - next time I bump into him in the lifts I will even dare to say so.

jamesco

This bit should appeal:

"15 mile segregated route between White City to Canary Wharf and Barking"

Currently, there's no decent way of getting between West and East (Ealing and Shoreditch ), so it could be a big improvement.

Has anyone got a link to a map with the proposed routes?

jds_1981

Think they should have a ramp rather than curb on both the road and cycle lane sides. This would allow me to perform impressive transfers between the two.

pangolin

jonomc4 wrote:

I have tried to cycle along the embankment when it was busy and it was a total nightmare - I reckon I averaged about 2mph - I ended up having to cycle on the path in the middle which meant stopping every few meters for pedestrians trying to cross - the embankment to me seems like a great idea!

Basically for all the moaning about Boris - this is the first time significant money and political will is being focused on bikes and I say good on him - next time I bump into him in the lifts I will even dare to say so.

Eh? Which bit are you on about?

TheStone

I don't like it. It's using a lot of money and space to make things slower.

Everyone seems to think the Dutch model is the best, but it's awful. Trying to get through the Netherlands is a frustrating mess. I usually end up on the road, but because they've spent so much on the cycle infrastructure, the drivers don't like this (although they tell you in a very polite way, presuming you don't realise there's paths)

Belgium is much better. It's mostly just paint along the side of the road, much like the superhighways, but they don't randomly stop for bus stops, car parking etc and the driving rules and culture mostly give cyclists priority at roundabouts and complex junctions. They have some paths, but seems to be much better than the Dutch.

keyser__soze

One of the good things I think we'll all hopefully agree on is the plan for stricter enforcement of ASLs and mandatory cycle lanes, facilitating a similar enforcement system to those of bus lanes. Drivers invariably keep out of bus lanes as they're all too aware that they'll get fined for entering them - hopefully the same thinking will apply to cycle lanes.

pete_s

TheStone wrote:

Everyone seems to think the Dutch model is the best, but it's awful. Trying to get through the Netherlands is a frustrating mess..

Oh, yeh, the country that's famously bad for cycling. It's so awful, so inefficient that they're only able to achieve a 25% modal share of bike use.

The proof is in the pudding of course. Most pictures of people cycling in the Netherlands shows how much of a grim time these people are all having. It's also incredibly exclusive and most people are actually turned off - only the fastest and most confident are able to ride a bike.

Some evidence to back up my claims:




There are also stories that most children are driven to school in cars because the conditions are so unsafe and the infrastructure so poor.




Haven't any of these people heard of vehicular cycling? It's much cheaper to implement than the billion odd pounds Boris is going to spend. All you need to do is take the lane and basically all the cars just stop behind you and makes it super-safe.




To quote the wise man Mr. Spok, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

notsoblue

pete_s wrote:

I understand TheStone's point though, if you want to ride for sport, these changes will be a bit disappointing.

hubgearfan

TheStone wrote:

I don't like it. It's using a lot of money and space to make things slower.

Everyone seems to think the Dutch model is the best, but it's awful. Trying to get through the Netherlands is a frustrating mess. I usually end up on the road, but because they've spent so much on the cycle infrastructure, the drivers don't like this (although they tell you in a very polite way, presuming you don't realise there's paths)

Belgium is much better. It's mostly just paint along the side of the road, much like the superhighways, but they don't randomly stop for bus stops, car parking etc and the driving rules and culture mostly give cyclists priority at roundabouts and complex junctions. They have some paths, but seems to be much better than the Dutch.

Anyone know how Denmark (another major cycling culture) compares, out of interest?

Applespider

It will be interesting to see how much of it actually happens and how much of that money gets spent.

I did appreciate the bit quoted above that they don't want to lose the right of cyclists to use any road but I am concerned about how they plan on cleaning/maintaining/de-icing these segregated lanes.

The other bit that sounded interesting are the 'Quiet-ways' that will follow Tube and major road routes. Apparently there will be a 'South Circular' quietway which might be useful since while the South Circ isn't bad outside rush hour, it is still narrow enough at spots that an HGV passing can be terrifying. And while when I started cycling, I tried routes 'around' the South Circ, I ended up lost in strangely winding side streets so a well-signposted route would be helpful.

iPete

Looked quite good on the news to be honest, laughed at the head of the cabbie union being upset, no vested interested there..

rjsterry

iPete wrote:

Looked quite good on the news to be honest, laughed at the head of the cabbie union being upset, no vested interested there..

He did seem like he'd been sent straight from central casting, going on about all the commercial traffic that 'we' would be holding up as though no cyclist could possibly contribute to the economy of the city.

EKE_38BPM

pete_s wrote:

...The proof is in the pudding of course...

NO! The proof isn't in the pudding. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Get it right.

I get the bad feeling that this proposed new infrastructure won't go ahead as advertised and even if it does, it won't help anyone going North/South. Ignorant motorised road users will have an even bigger sense of entitlement about their exclusive use of the road. "Get out of my way and onto your £1billion piece of infrastructure that you don't pay road tax for!"
As others have said, commuting from the suburbs will hardly change, most of the journey would still rely on vehicular cycling until you reach some sort of innercity cycle-friendly nirvana where you are stuck behind nonlycra louts, pootling along at a snail's pace and weaving all over the segregated lane in such an erratic manner that it is hard to pass them safely.

I have two major problems with the Westway plan.
1: I think it will be BLOODY windy up there. Probably all of the time.
2: Its going to be some climb to get up there. Underpasses and flyovers have been designed for motorised transport and the vertical angles are pretty steep. I would like to see a comparison between the gradient onto The Westway with other notable London hills. Coming down will be great fun but getting up there in the first place will be hard work.

For all of my naysaying, I look forward to seeing what actually happens and I was much more optimistic about it when I saw Lord Chris Boardman of Veloshire on the news. He knows what he's talking about and calls a spade a spade.

rjsterry

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I have two major problems with the Westway plan.
1: I think it will be BLOODY windy up there. Probably all of the time.
2: Its going to be some climb to get up there. Underpasses and flyovers have been designed for motorised transport and the vertical angles are pretty steep. I would like to see a comparison between the gradient onto The Westway with other notable London hills. Coming down will be great fun but getting up there in the first place will be hard work.

For all of my naysaying, I look forward to seeing what actually happens and I was much more optimistic about it when I saw Lord Chris Boardman of Veloshire on the news. He knows what he's talking about and calls a spade a spade.

Good points. I've ridden over one of the flyovers down near the Excel, which was both steep and windswept: not fun, and I normally like hills.

56mph

I think this is superb news for London cyclists, a complete game changer and politically inconceivable even only two years' ago. Boris has firmly nailed his colours to the cyclists' mast even if that means standing up to the very strong and entrenched car and taxi lobby.
I am confident that increasing further the critical mass of cyclists on the roads is exactly where we need to be heading. Although I understand the concerns of the lycra-clad racers, which often includes me, I think we should applaud any measures that get more bums on bikes and, who knows, the new arrivals may in time also discover the joys of a riding a racing bike.

greg66_tri_v2.0

I'm with RJS on this. From a selfish point of view, I don't like the sound of this one bit. It won't mean I'll get to work faster; on the contrary, it's likely to make that journey slower. The volume of cyclists on the Embankment is often high enough to fill a car lane, so there's no way it will fit comfortably into a cycle lane. Overtaking within the cycle lane will carry its own set of problems, but mostly I'd be concerned about riders clipping any divider (eg large cats' eyes or kerbs) and tipping themselves into the traffic. It separates "us" (cyclists) from "them" (cars) which I think in the long term isn't good for promoting cyclist-aware driving skills. I doubt that the cyclists in the cycle lanes will clear them of debris as effectively as cars clear the road; and finally, I'm particularly wary of the mention of "mandatory cycle lanes".

However, I can see that these proposals aren't directed at me, and those to whom they are directed are likely to benefit from them. I can well see that Mrs 66 would be more likely to ride into central London with these measures in place, and would be happier about 66 major and minor doing so. One thing I particularly liked the look of was trying to change the times of day that goods/commercial vehicles would be allowed into central London.

Anyway, we shall see what happens. It's unlikely, I suppose, that what we end up with will be precisely what's in the TFL document.

In other news, WTF has the road been narrowed at the zebra crossing on Viccy Embankment (close to the needle, IIRC)? That was a perfectly good bit of wide road with a straight kerb. Now the kerb has been moved into the road either side of the zebra, which pushes us into the left hand traffic stream. For no obvious reason. Nuts.

il_principe

I think it all looks pretty good TBH. I understand people's concerns about segregation and the behaviour that it may breed, I also understand the concerns re being slowed down, but really if you want to ride fast, then Central London was never really the place to do so. None of us have to travel that far to find country roads etc should we wish to put the hammer down. The point of this plan is to get more people cycling and hopefully address the perceptions that exist around cycle-safety. Seems like a bold step in the right direction.