Cycle campaigning

my impression was they were claiming they could fund it by developing the land freed up by knocking down the flyover. is that wrong?

That's the theory. Putting the A4 underground would release a strip of land that could be 2-3 miles long and presumably developers would be queuing up to build on it.

There doesn't appear to be a proper study on the economics and feasibility yet, however. Surface roads would still be needed for access to all those new developments and anything involving tunnel boring machines will mean big construction sites at the ends.

Just because something works in Holland doesn't mean it will here. Using an example from that post, imagine how much fun this would be for everyone with London's famous Cat 6 racing.

this is for the 90% that are too scared to ride in London. After having had an 'incident' in 2012 that I'm still recovering from - I'm all for this as well.

It the application of scientific method that I like most in all of this.

Easier to change the culture of the few mad commuters on bikes than the mad commuters in cars.

this is for the 90% that are too scared to ride in London. After having had an 'incident' in 2012 that I'm still recovering from - I'm all for this as well.

Fair enough, but how do you suggest preventing abuse of such facilities by those who are too arrogant to use them without the appropriate respect for other people?

^^ Or so you'd hope. I'm not so sure.

Easier to change the culture of the few mad commuters on bikes than the mad commuters in cars.

The aim should be to tackle the source of the problem, so bad drivers going too fast, rather than to segregate.

This applies to pedestrians as well as cyclists. Changes in town infrastructure show how opened up areas make drivers slow down and pay more attention, rather than streets with railings that ghettoise the more vulnerable street users.

If peds end up feeling comfortable enough to walk across the road without fear that a car slightly exceeded 30mph passing by, then it's comfortable enough to cycle.

The segregation debate is like the helmet debate, futile and circular, it causes infighting between people who want more people cycling. It saps energy from real campaigning.
#whataboutthechildren?
#thinkaboutthepoorgrannyridingat10milesanhour

'a kerb nerd protests':

http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/a-kerb-nerd-protests/

I know of one section of kerbless cycleway similar to this (from ^ blog post)

which is no pleasure to use as the legislation to keep it free of cars isn't in place.

Similarly stretches of segregation in g.mancs where residents park all the time.

Reason being that the only legislation to ban cars (vehicles) would also ban cycles (vehicles).

Who is campaigning on issues such as this?

^ and how will the campaign overcome objection of the higher numbers of nimfy residents (aka electorate) who'd lose their convenient "parking"?

The segregation debate is like the helmet debate, futile and circular, it causes infighting between people who want more people cycling. It saps energy from real campaigning.
#whataboutthechildren?
#thinkaboutthepoorgrannyridingat10milesanhour

there shouldn't even be a debate. even at 20mph, even with the best-behaved drivers and strongest legislation possible, can anyone seriously imagine above granniesandchildren sharing the road with 100 buses and 100 hgvs an hour on the mile end road...?

terrifying for parents, but also terrifying for drivers. would anyone really want to drive a hgv surrounded by crowds of 10 yr olds on bikes?

there's no other option to protected space on some routes. so we should all be campaigning to ensure it's as well-designed as possible where it's necessary - and where there clearly is another option (through-traffic removal, in particular) we should be campaigining for that...

^ are the vehicle per hour numbers you state there measured from a fixed point on the roadside, or a dynamic point moving along the mile end road at the average speed of a granny or child cycling?

terrifying for parents, but also terrifying for drivers. would anyone really want to drive a hgv surrounded by crowds of 10 yr olds on bikes?

Interesting point.
How would people drive were there crowds of 10 year olds and grannies surrounding them? How would the occasional driver dropping their kids off drive to school on a road where most people walked and cycled to the school. With care and slowly i suspect, especially if they were punished by law if they didn't

The A10 dalston to shoreditch is a case in point. Currently it is a not very busy stretch , occasional buses in the bus lane and not highly trafficked even in the rush hour. There is currently a parallel route that goes through Hoxton bringing you out on Shoreditch high street.

Hackney council wish to lower the speed on A10 to 20mph (ensure the bus drivers have been trained on bikes) and improve the parallel quiet route. To me that is a much better, lower risk option, and good for the urban realm on the A10 and gives people on bikes better options than seperate cycle tracks along the A10 that some of those twitter campaigners keep going on about.

London road junctions to be redesigned announced

per Londonist,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26354090

Thirty-three junctions where more than 250 cyclists and pedestrians have been seriously injured or killed in the last three years are to have £300m spent on them.

here's the map:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/26_2_14_junctions.pdf

17 - Nag's Head Gyratory.

Does that mean the whole section between Finsbury Park and Holloway Prison?

24 - Stockwell Gyratory

That's a gyratory system?!

17 - Nag's Head Gyratory.

Does that mean the whole section between Finsbury Park and Holloway Prison?
Yes. The initial TfL options are crap, though.

24 - Stockwell Gyratory

That's a gyratory system?!
It's a one-way system involving three streets, yes. A small one, but the principle is there. Resolving this was a big opportunity missed in the initial implementation of the 'Superhighway' there.

I thought a gyratory was a system where you could get to any point from any point, no? And you can't really do that from Stockwell, I thought?

edit: I'm basing this on the idea that a "gyratory" is basically like a kind of roundabout, and I'm basing that on Wikipedia which as we all know, is never wrong

Gyratory = 1 way system that muppets on bikes will inevitably try to tackle the wrong way round.

I thought a gyratory was a system where you could get to any point from any point, no? And you can't really do that from Stockwell, I thought?

You're right in the sense that generally, as with many gyratories in London, Stockwell has been changed over the years from the original, 'pure' concept, e.g. fitted with signals, and on your specific point, it is no longer possible (as it used to be) to turn right from the A3 Clapham Road into the A3/A203 South Lambeth Road (and possibly other, less prominent banned turns). This is because motor traffic capacity has been maximised in the radial sense, i.e. towards and from Central London, at the expense of movements deemed less important. There wouldn't be any point in inventing lots of sub-classifications for these other than 'borked gyratory' if you want.

edit: I'm basing this on the idea that a "gyratory" is basically like a kind of roundabout, and I'm basing that on Wikipedia which as we all know, is never wrong
What goes round on Wikipedia comes round.

If you want to do a little campaigning tonight (deadline is tonight), last call to join the CPRE in telling the Government what you think of their road-building programme.

http://www.cpre.org.uk/how-you-can-help/take-action/transport/item/3534-help-us-reject-a-road-building-rampage

Easy to send an automated e-mail (best to re-formulate it a bit). Explanation on the page.

youve probably seen this?
replace Britains urban roundabouts with this?
http://www.protectedintersection.com/

So another twitter spat (twatter spit?) about Bikeability / segregation etc by the usual crowd today.

Interesting article from the economist about campaigning which some of our more mono-tracked-hectorers could do with heeding

In an era of scepticism and division, standing on rigid principle can be a blunder, it turns out: a tool for firing up partisans, useless for swaying voters in the middle. Though injustice still exists, today’s voters want to be wooed, not hectored.