Nuxx:Mlui25dm1036sout5paqjti3d0o4r3oi2h@4ax.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!feeder.news-service.com!cyclone01.ams2.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!npeersf01.ams.highwinds-media.com!newsfe20.ams2.POSTED!7564ea0f!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: for_chappers@null.null Newsgroups: uk.transport.london,uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: First two "Cycle Superhighway" routes announced Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:12:42 +0100 References: <52b9693b-224f-4bb2-aef0-e805679bb4af@d31g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>  <8e8ba3af-4dc2-4d1f-b433-ed3daea2594a@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.com> Lines: 198 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.12.82.202 X-Complaints-To: http://netreport.virginmedia.com X-Trace: newsfe20.ams2 1244232791 86.12.82.202 (Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:13:11 UTC) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 20:13:11 UTC Organization: virginmedia.com Bytes: 11825 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:707804

On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 12:33:06 -0700 (PDT), TimB  wrote:

>On Jun 5, 7:12 pm, for_chapp...@null.null wrote: >> On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:41:28 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T  >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Mayoral press release: >> >http://london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=22318 >> >> >Excerpts... >> >--- --- >> >London's Cycle Superhighways - First two routes unveiled >> >5-6-2009 >> >> >The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, today unveiled proposed routes for >> >the first two of London’s twelve Cycle Superhighways - the corridors >> >for cyclists that are a key part of his policy to stimulate a cycling >> >revolution in the capital. >> >> >The two pilot routes, which will be up and running in May 2010, are >> >from South Wimbledon to Bank via the A24 and A3, and Barking to Tower >> >Hill via the A13 and Cable Street. The Mayor and TfL are consulting >> >closely with the eight boroughs that the routes will run through. >> >> >The aim of the Cycle Superhighways is to provide safe, direct and >> >continuous routes into central London from the outer boroughs, making >> >life easier for cyclists and encouraging those who travel into work by >> >other modes of transport to commute by bike, helping to cut >> >congestion, relieve overcrowding, and cutting emissions. >> >> >Another ten routes, spanning across London and greatly improving the >> >capital’s cycling infrastructure, are being developed ahead of 2012, >> >with each route covering between 10 and 15km. >> >[...] >> >Each route will be given its own identity with consistent and easy to >> >follow road markings and signs. Safety issues will be addressed >> >through specific measures such as the provision of advance stop boxes >> >and providing continuous lanes through junctions as appropriate. >> >> >In addition, obstructions will be minimised and improvements made to >> >road surfaces to ensure a smoother ride. >> >[...] >> >> >Notes to Editors >> >> >The first two Cycle Superhighways are planned for delivery in May 2010 >> >and will run along the following routes: >> >> >For the South Wimbledon to Bank route: A24, A3 and Southwark Bridge >> >Road passing through the boroughs of Merton, Wandsworth, Lambeth, >> >Southwark and City of London. >> >> >For the Barking to Tower Hill route: A13, Poplar High Street, Narrow >> >Street and Cable Street passing through the boroughs of Barking and >> >Dagenham, Newham, Tower Hamlets and City of London. >> >--- --- >> >> >There's also a link to a PDF map of the 12 indicative routes: >> >http://london.gov.uk/news/docs/cycle-superhighways-map.pdf >> >> >I haven't been following this as closely as I might have - I think the >> >hyperbole inherent in the phrase "Cycle Superhighway" rather made me >> >somewhat dismissive of early talk of the idea as being just some Boris- >> >esque babble - but it is for real, as a real project has grown from >> >that somewhat unlikely sounding germ of an idea. >> >> >We're not going to get actual cycle only highways, with grade >> >separated junctions, slow medium and fast lanes (yes yes you're not >> >supposed to call them that - lanes 1,2, and 3 then), a hard shoulder >> >and dot-matrix displays that tell warn you of a long-gone fog patch. >> >Instead this is, as the press release says, about providing direct >> >routes from the suburbs into central London along existing road >> >corridors - we're not about to get a cycle highway building scheme to >> >match the road building schemes of the past! Cyclists won't get a >> >segregated route, at least not all the way (and I'm not counting >> >mandatory cycle lanes on the same carriageway as a properly segregated >> >route), but various measures are apparently to be taken to improve >> >these routes for cyclists. >> >> >I'm now going to take a look at each of the two routes in a bit more >> >detail... >> >> >* South Wimbledon to Bank, route 7 >> >> >One of the first routes (route 7 on the map) is from South Wimbledon >> >to Bank - this is basically the 'Northern line route' as it shadows >> >the line (more historically accurately, the line was built under the >> >road on purpose so as to get round wayleave issues when going under >> >private property). This relatively straight A23 and A3 route is >> >already very well used by cycle commuters, many of whom are likely to >> >have opted for it instead of the ultra-busy Northern line - this is >> >helped by the fact that there isn't an obvious parallel route on >> >quieter side streets to follow. >> >> >In a sense the critical mass of cyclists using this route (at peak >> >times at least) could be said to already make it a 'cycle highway' >> >anyway - in that sense choosing it as one of the first routes is >> >perhaps a bit of an 'easy win'. Nonetheless it'll be interesting to >> >see what changes are made. Presumably at Elephant & Castle the route >> >will be signed to direct people around the pre-existing LCN [1] 'cycle >> >bypass' on the side streets as opposed to through the main road >> >junction - the big plan is for both the roundabouts to go eventually >> >(the southern one should be gone much sooner), so perhaps the cycle >> >route would eventually go direct through the Elephant. >> >> >* Barking to Tower Hill, route 3 >> >> >The other of the first routes (route 3 on the map) is from Barking to >> >Tower Hill. This goes along the A13 for a considerable distance - if >> >I'm not much mistaken, for much if not all of the stretch of the A13 >> >from Barking to Poplar there is already a cycle pathway adjacent to >> >the road, albeit perhaps a shared use path with pedestrians. >> >Significant upgrades took place on this stretch of the A13 only a few >> >years ago [1] - remodelled carriageways and grade separated junctions >> >were one outcome, and I believe the provision of an adjacent cycle >> >pathway was another (not sure this existed as such beforehand). So >> >actually there's the essence of a fairly ready-made route there - >> >that's not to say that it's necessarily kitted out as well as it could >> >be. >> >> >From Poplar, Poplar High Street, Narrow Street and Cable Street are >> >fairly common sense ways to take the route on into central London - >> >indeed they are all I think already designated as part of the existing >> >London Cycle Network. It seems that this side-street route won out >> >over trying to make East India Dock Road and Commercial Road more >> >cycle friendly - but there is heavy motor traffic on these roads, >> >especially what with them serving the Blackwall Tunnel and Rotherhithe >> >Tunnel. And I don't think you could make the Highway E1 into a "Cycle >> >Superhighway" however hard you tried! >> >> >Narrow Street was of course where Bozza and Co had there near miss >> >with a lorry and it's flailing doors, which illustrates well the >> >inherent issues in sharing road space between cyclists and motor >> >vehicles, specifically great big heavy lorries that are being driven >> >too fast. I'm interested to see what restrictions if any are put on >> >traffic down Narrow Street, given that it's an obvious rat-run used by >> >motorists to escape the traffic of the parallel A13. >> >> >So the whole "Cycle Superhighway" project looks interesting, but the >> >real test of it is of course what actually happens on the ground. The >> >"Cycle Superhighways" project has led to Boris shelving the completion >> >of the LCN+, which I think is a shame. The "Cycle Superhighways" are >> >based on commuter cycling into central London - but there are so many >> >other potential cycle journeys that don't involve that. The plotting >> >of decent routes along quiet back streets, signing them properly and >> >connecting them up appropriately undoubtedly suits other types of >> >cyclists, or indeed just styles of cycling (and a 'straight to the >> >point' cycle commuter might well like a somewhat more meandering but >> >pleasant route when making a leisure trip). And of course LCN+ routes >> >also suit other inter-urban cycle journeys. However it is perhaps true >> >to say that LCN+ is not ideal for working out longer cycle commute >> >routes into town. >> >> >Which I think shows that a good part of this "Cycle Superhighway" >> >scheme is actually in the branding, i.e. in making the route >> >information easily and instantly available whether on the ground or on >> >paper/the web. I still think the actual name's a bit dodgy though! >> >> >I am encouraged to read in the press release Boris saying that he's >> >"militant about cycling", and talking about bringing about a "cycling >> >revolution" - we shall see how these new "Cycle Superhighways" turn >> >out. Nonetheless, it's perhaps worth bearing in mind that this is the >> >same Boris who has cut cycle funding elsewhere - see: >> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/nov/21/london-cycling-boris-j... >> >> What a monstrous waste of money. These expensive routes will START >> very lightly trafficked as selfish cyclists insist on their "right" to >> use roads with other traffic, and will quickly fall off to near-zero >> when the few who DO use them start whining that they're full of broken >> glass, pedestrians, and other hazards that 'disrupt' their journeys. >> Funny, they don't give a shit when they disrupt everyone ELSE'S >> journeys... >> Far better to make them roads instead, and let the bikes take their >> chances just as they do on other carraigeways. Ironically, opening the >> routes up to cars will actually turn out to put MORE bike traffic on >> them, not less! > >If you could be arsed to actually read the comments above you'd see >that these are not segregated routes ie cyclists will be using the >roads. What's the disruption to other people's journeys you talk of?

If YOU could be arsed to read you'd find that these are segregated lanes, i.e. dedicated for cycling. Which means that the selfish sanctimonious twats on bikes will inevitably ignore them, ostensibly because they get road detritus in them which is not swept by car tyres, but more honestly because they do love playing 'holier than thou so you'll have to fucking wait behind me' with cars.

>Oh, I see, forcing you to lift your foot for a moment so you get to >the next jam a second later? > Tim

New day, same old bollocks. Tell me, when the psycholists inevitably trot out this tired phrase, is it US they're trying to convince that there's a jam up the road anyway, or THEMSELVES?