What is cycle proofing?

Chris Boardman calls for cycle proofing all infrastructure in British Cycling's video

This involves:
Low speed limits
Permeable cycle only access such as contraflow cycle lanes
Dedicated space on all urban roads (not sure about this one)
parallel off road facilities on duekll carriageways
priority at junctions.

Some good ideas here
[url="http://vimeo.com/71878922"][/url
]

He's definitely got ulterior motives and one eye on Seb Coe

he is also mainly talking sense and isn't wearing a helmet or hi viz so looks pretty normal (unlike Seb Coe)

Parallel cycle paths on dual carriageways would probably mean the end of fast time trial courses.

But more importantly:

Cycle paths tend to threaten our general right to use the roads.

I sometimes use the Great West Road going past Brentford and Hounslow, and this has a cycle path which is a complete nightmare, but even early on Sunday morning when there is almost no traffic I find I get abuse from motorists if I don’t use it, and if a motorist did hit me it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to think what his defence would be.

Why don’t I want to use that cycle path? Apart from the minor problems like the cars parked on it and the coating of grit, the major fault is the frequent side road intersections where traffic from the main road has the right of way, and these turn any attempt at rapid progress into a rather dangerous form of interval training. I have already had one moderately bad crash on this path (with another cyclist – his fault, but I smashed a good front rim), and a few near misses with cars. It’s not just the A4 path that has this problem.

Compared with the length of time that roads have existed it is only relatively recently that pedestrians have not been able to walk on the highway, but that is certainly not a right I would like to try to exercise today.

Let’s be careful what we wish for.

Parallel cycle paths on dual carriageways would probably mean the end of fast time trial courses.

Unless the law changed, not necessary as the UK is one of the few European countries that allowed cycling on the road even if there's a cycle path nearby.

The biggest issue is eduction - quite a lots of drivers are under the impression it's illegal for cyclists to ride outside the cycle lane/path, while the highway code stated it's perfectly fine if you don't feel it meet your safety requirement.

I don't want segregated cycle paths! I have to dodge enough nodders on my commute as it is - I don't want more of 'em squeezed into a tiny path.

Also, I am traffic. Stop making what I do look so dangerous it requires separate paths. Stop letting drivers get away with murder.

Pretty much every cycle path in this country is rubbish - why make more?

Unless the law changed,.

Well that is the threat.

It has already been suggested, and I actually had an interview with my MP (Phillip Hammond) to complain about it last time it was on the agenda.

I don't suppose it made any difference, but at least he has heard the argument...........well, once, some time ago.

Parallel cycle paths on dual carriageways would probably mean the end of fast time trial courses.

Good. Chasing times on fast courses, many of which are motorways in all but name, is lunacy.

But more importantly:

Cycle paths tend to threaten our general right to use the roads.

I sometimes use the Great West Road going past Brentford and Hounslow, and this has a cycle path which is a complete nightmare, but even early on Sunday morning when there is almost no traffic I find I get abuse from motorists if I don’t use it, and if a motorist did hit me it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to think what his defence would be.

Why don’t I want to use that cycle path? Apart from the minor problems like the cars parked on it and the coating of grit, the major fault is the frequent side road intersections where traffic from the main road has the right of way, and these turn any attempt at rapid progress into a rather dangerous form of interval training. I have already had one moderately bad crash on this path (with another cyclist – his fault, but I smashed a good front rim), and a few near misses with cars. It’s not just the A4 path that has this problem.

Compared with the length of time that roads have existed it is only relatively recently that pedestrians have not been able to walk on the highway, but that is certainly not a right I would like to try to exercise today.

Let’s be careful what we wish for.

The aim here is to make roads suitable for all road users, not just cars, and to encourage more people to cycle. Whilst we, as experienced cyclists, would prefer not to use a dedicated cycle path, we are in a minority I'm afraid.

The biggest issue is eduction -

Ed, any chance you might try proof reading your posts?

Good. Chasing times on fast courses, many of which are motorways in all but name, is lunacy.
.

I don't entirely disagree with this comment, but unfortunately since the RTTC (as it then was) banned 'u' turns for safety reasons, there has been an increasing tendency to ride on dual carriageways because there is no where else practical to go.

I left some slip every now and then.

The aim here is to make roads suitable for all road users, not just cars, and to encourage more people to cycle. Whilst we, as experienced cyclists, would prefer not to use a dedicated cycle path, we are in a minority I'm afraid.

That's it though - you are NOT making "make roads suitable for all road users" you are moving one type of user to somewhere else where they possibly cease to be an issue.. except that is when there's a road with no cycle path and the oblivious drivers take offence at the cyclist slowing them down, blah blah, you get the idea.

I don't entirely disagree with this comment, but unfortunately since the RTTC (as it then was) banned 'u' turns for safety reasons, there has been an increasing tendency to ride on dual carriageways because there is no where else practical to go.

I don't find DCs to be too bad. At least you generally have a good view of the road. Road racing around twisting, single-lane roads on the other hand requires rolling road closures to be safe.

I don't want segregated cycle paths! I have to dodge enough nodders on my commute as it is - I don't want more of 'em squeezed into a tiny path.

Also, I am traffic. Stop making what I do look so dangerous it requires separate paths. Stop letting drivers get away with murder.

Pretty much every cycle path in this country is rubbish - why make more?

All of this x 1,000000000000000000

just heard on the news "government to invest £94 million on cycling in england"

I'm sure you'll all be please to hear that none of it is being spent in london and 17million being spent in national parks???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23657010

There is a simple and very **cheap **method of improving safety for cyclists which could be introduced here as it has been in some European countries. It is this:
**
Shift the burden of proof in the event of a car/bike accident to the motorist.**

I'm not suggesting that motorist should always be liable, just that there should be some kind of presumption that the car driver is at fault. This isn't the place to discuss the fine tuning of the arrangement, but I don't think it would take a great deal to make drivers more careful, thereby saving lives and probably gaining some votes.

Just think of the difference in cost between one piece of legislation and a network of cycle lanes!

I was thinking about this at lunch (thrilling detail that eh?), as I walked around London watching the various traffic offences committed by the majority of vehicles.

Before embarking on shared use, segregated paths, different light phasing, etc etc why don't we try enforcing the current rules and regulations?

Oliver mentioned this the other day- it seems that in the UK we simply don't have any enforcement of traffic regs- that which we do have tends to either be focussed on a specific junction for a couple of mornings, or done via camera and therefore long after the fact.

Before we introduce strict liability why not introduce strict enforcement - if someone has managed to tot up 12 points on one journey by driving with no regards to speed limits, bus lanes, ASL's etc then lets get them banned for 2 years with a compulsory re-test before they get a licence again.

Nah, then how would Johhny Drunkenkiller be able to continue driving skip lorries around London in support of his drug habit?

stop dreaming about hs2 superhogways and sort London out now

I don't mind the idea of HS2 but then I don't live near it. I would not like it to ruin the Chilterns so I reserve judgement on that. Trains are good.

Before embarking on shared use, segregated paths, different light phasing, etc etc why don't we try enforcing the current rules and regulations?

Because of the additional cost.

They've just announced 90million to spend on painting sections of road blue.

I guess the blue paint might make it quicker to clean blood up?

I was thinking about this at lunch (thrilling detail that eh?), as I walked around London watching the various traffic offences committed by the majority of vehicles.

Before embarking on shared use, segregated paths, different light phasing, etc etc why don't we try enforcing the current rules and regulations?

Oliver mentioned this the other day- it seems that in the UK we simply don't have any enforcement of traffic regs- that which we do have tends to either be focussed on a specific junction for a couple of mornings, or done via camera and therefore long after the fact.

Before we introduce strict liability why not introduce strict enforcement - if someone has managed to tot up 12 points on one journey by driving with no regards to speed limits, bus lanes, ASL's etc then lets get them banned for 2 years with a compulsory re-test before they get a licence again.

This is a very valid point (which Oliver rightly raises regularly).

In addition to this enforcement point making driving harder and more expensive is also necessary (remember Stevenage's excellent yet empty cycle network that doesn't work because driving is so easy there.

Need sticks as well as carrots to get people on bikes

If you make driving more expensive you increase the sense of entitlement "I paid for this road, fuck off cyclist!"

Make cycling more desirable by making cyclists less likely to be killed.

Also if you focus on punishing another road using group then that's diluting your message.

^^^ Right but who's budget does that come out of/go into?

If you ask the police to do it it then it either increases their budget or they have to take money from somewhere else.

As for making driving more expensive. It's is a pretty narrow minded attitude. Driving is already incredibly expensive; passing your test, insuring your first car, purchase, general running costs, etc. Lots of people actually need their cars, so penalising those people hardly seems fair and are you only going to apply that to people in places like Stevenage?

Plus I echo Dammit's point about reinforcing a them and us.