TFL Cycle Superhighways

Do you reckon that all this skid mark near each junction illustrate the problem of having cycle lane?

(very hard to see in photos, but there were quite a bits when I was there in person).

Rode out from Whitechapel on the superhighway to Bow roundabout
Awfully designed along most of the route
They need to allocate the whole bus lane and where there's no bus lane, allocate a whole lane to cycling much too much car space so too many cars
http://www.bikebiz.com//news/read/transport-trade-mag-highlights-cycle-superhighway-deaths

the worst part about it is near the Whitechapel end of CS2 they removed the entire left lane being bus lane and painted a 2 foot wide cycle lane in the gutter instead. Luckily I have moved out of Bow now but it went from having a 6 foot wide bus lane to cycle in, to a 2 foot lane with fast moving traffic. Utter shit.

There seems to be a serious problem with perception when it comes to car congestion. The council/government seem to see traffic jams in cities and think 'how can we make more space for cars' when they should be seeing a perfect disincentive to drive. Let driving me a nightmare, it'll reduce the number of drivers, pushing people onto public transport and cycles. Same with new housing/shopping developments. There's always a planning issue with parking spaces and congestion - yeah, let it be a nightmare to park, people will have to use their legs or get public transport. Sheesh...

Obviously, there should be decent disabled parking, but this should be enforced so that some lazy git with a blue badge from a disabled aunt can't park in it...

^^^ I actually prefer road junctions left 'raw'. I.E. without any manipulation to make them 'easy' to drive or ride. Keeps people alert and thinking, but if you dumb them down then people honestly do the same, they shut down and just bludgeon on pretty much without thinking and then you get accidents where there shouldn't be.

^^ in planning terms, this happens. ie. "car-free" or very low parking residential developments, but can only happen where public transport is very good (PTAL rating 5 or 6).

I think the PTAL methodology is a load of pants, as it preconditions areas with low PTALs against future development of public transport.

I have to cycle through CS3 daily and there's one bit, that goes on the pavement without any notice / signs to pedestrians about shared area. Then it goes through the arch with a bollard in the middle. Total blind zone for everybody. Another end of that pavement has a barrier manned by security with slow reaction. Will post pictures later.

^^ I agree it's very crude and in many areas misleading - but how does it precondition against future development of public transport? Do you mean by not creating the conditions of residential/commercial density that would lead to public transport infrastructure investment? (chicken and egg)

No, I mean by explicitly allowing and facilitating certain levels of car parking. Oh, there's a public transport vacuum? Let's fill it with car parking, because the PTAL tells us that's fine.

If they allowed demand for public transport, and, indeed, for cycling to develop, it would all happen.

Obviously, the benefit of PTALs is to protect locations which have a high PTAL from too much car parking. It's the other side of the equation that needs more work.

yes I agree.
I'm sure you're aware of it but the London Plan states a maximum level of parking, so there is always a ceiling, you can't provide more than that - PTAL and traffic assessments generally, are used as an argument for not needing to provide that level, since planners seem to read "maximum" as "default"/"normal", unfortunately.
Actually it's not the planners, more like the councillors that sit on planning committees, and the highways and transport officers. Developers would rather not provide the parking if they can avoid it, they usually just want MOAR FLATS.

Yes, and the maximum levels were still much too high. And no doubt you've heard about this?

www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/briefing-papers/SN05054.pdf

Yes, it's dire.

I don't know when the London Plan will reflect this in its text (I haven't looked at it for a while, but I don't think it's in the current version).

Yes, here's a case where maximums become minimums, unfortunately.

It depends re: more flats vs. more car parking; where car parking adds enough to the price of a flat that developers make more from more car parking than from more flats, they tend to be in favour of more car parking. We've had a couple of cases of that in Hackney. The end result are the usual awful basement car parks which so disrupt a building's relation to street level and make for appalling urban design. Latham's is the worst example--600 car parking spaces, the Council tried to oppose it, won at the Public Inquiry, overruled by the Secretary of State without giving any reasons.

ugh, no I didn't know that. I haven't been paying much attention to parking policy for a couple of years. so, now there is no maximum, and since there is no cap on parking charges, the councils will see them as a rather attractive option.

previously, the maximum provision table was absolutely essential to enable planners to fend off the pressure from councillors, local interest groups and the highways dept for always more parking. "giving them what they want" (which is essentially what the leaflet claims to want to do) when the culture of right to drive, and right to park, exists, is a nonsense.

also, I didn't realise that MP's "information notes" were written in such language, it's like a bad school history essay, all "he said"s and emotive claims in conversational language that aren't attributed to quotes. ugh.

I find these notes very useful, because they enable you to save on some reading. :)

The current Government's 'work' on planning is simply utterly depressing. :(

There seems to be a serious problem with perception when it comes to car congestion. The council/government seem to see traffic jams in cities and think 'how can we make more space for cars' when they should be seeing a perfect disincentive to drive. Let driving me a nightmare, it'll reduce the number of drivers, pushing people onto public transport and cycles. Same with new housing/shopping developments. There's always a planning issue with parking spaces and congestion - yeah, let it be a nightmare to park, people will have to use their legs or get public transport. Sheesh...

Obviously, there should be decent disabled parking, but this should be enforced so that some lazy git with a blue badge from a disabled aunt can't park in it...

yes there are too many cars and trying to plan for them is causing serious problems.

i think if we went to 20 mph in all built up areas many people would make the switch to not owning a car.

thus over time reducing congestion.

and with 20 mph all road users get a safety uplift.

(and not owning a car would take many out of debt and / or away from illegal driving).

20mph across town may become a reality in cambridge soon: http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home/Calls-for-blanket-20mph-limit-across-Cambridge-25112011.htm

Here is TfLs proposal for Bow Roundabout redesign (in light of the recent deaths there):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gIktrH3b82g

I don't like it and would probably stay in the lanes with the car drivers who would probably have their light phase longer and get through quicker, but because of the blue stuff they'll be hooting at me for not using the CS. There would also still be conflict with left turners.

I think they should reduce the lanes for private cars and lorrys to one and have a bus/cycle lane as the left lane. and reduce the speed limit to 20mph

i get a lots of conflict and near misses for not using the smurfway a lots, and it wearing me thin.

that design doesn't look look, still have the risk of a left turning vehicles despite a painted line.

bus lane worked brilliantly as cycle lane too, with the considerate bus driver and the idea width of the bus lane, it's the perfect cycle lane.

The CS on my way to work is annoying. I work odd hours, and it only seems to be a cycle lane at rush hour times. When I ride to work it's full of parked cars, and I'm being buzzed by cars constantly.

Here is TfLs proposal for Bow Roundabout redesign (in light of the recent deaths there):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gIktrH3b82g

I don't like it and would probably stay in the lanes with the car drivers who would probably have their light phase longer and get through quicker, but because of the blue stuff they'll be hooting at me for not using the CS. There would also still be conflict with left turners.

I think they should reduce the lanes for private cars and lorrys to one and have a bus/cycle lane as the left lane. and reduce the speed limit to 20mph

The TFL video shows that the cycle lane gets a red light when main lanes are green, so assuming cyclists ride in the cycle lane and obey that light, there should be no cyclists in conflict with left turning cars at the first exit. Whether those assumptions are reasonable is another matter (the confusing repeater light after the cycle lane stop line suggests the designer's doubt).

The bit i really don't understand is the blue paint and second island on the roundabout itself. I don't see what conflict it's there to prevent - motor vehicles will be following the right hand bend of the road, so no left hooks there. The next point of conflict is the exit where departing motor vehicles could conflict with cyclists turning right (e.g. to get to tesco). The paint and island will just discourage right-turning cyclists from adopting sensible road postion, exacerbating conflict with motor vehicles that could have caught up with them by then.

The CS on my way to work is annoying. I work odd hours, and it only seems to be a cycle lane at rush hour times. When I ride to work it's full of parked cars, and I'm being buzzed by cars constantly.

CS is not in effect for 18 hours a day, for a 'superhighway', it's just a mere bicycle lane that's blue.

Yep, not impressed. A waste of money and a waste of blue paint.

Has anyone noticed how slippy the blue paint is when it rains? I've just come off turning slowly onto the lane behind e&c round about.

Yep. It's shite!