A new approach to road design.

[Cudzoziemiec]

At least one of the authors of the LTN is an audaxer.

[arabella]

I hope my pessimism in relation to the knowledge and motivation of my local highways engineers is misplaced.  Based on their current work, I don't think they meet number 20 of the core principles - "All designers of cycle schemes must experience the roads as a cyclist".  Hopefully this will help to change their mindset, the link to funding may provide an incentive even where there is currently very little interest.

Agreed.  At the moment I wouldn't even say that highways engineers even experience the pavements as pedestrians
Still less as pushers of pushchairs or with wheelchairs
[memories of trying to push a pushchair and 40kg worth of assorted children etc along a high kerbed pavement replete with dropped kerbs for those poor ickle motor vehicles to crawl into their private drives.  Why can't we raise the roads rather than drop the pavement, and make all road intersections up to pavement height to facilitated wheeled pedestrian progress.
ie design for the MOST vulnerable and then add in the next most vulnerable where it doesn't etc..  With private motorised traffic as an afterthought.]

[nobby]

So do we think anything will actually come of this? is this really a rare case of genuine competence?

or will it just be forgotten when the newscycle ends...
J

I see the Forbes article is written by Carlton Reid and his credentials as an advocate for cycling cannot be questioned.
I'm not sure that this government is intending to work to news cycles.

[MattH]

Why can't we raise the roads rather than drop the pavement, and make all road intersections up to pavement height to facilitated wheeled pedestrian progress.

That is common in some foreign parts - I first came across it in Sweden. It makes a big difference, especially combined with motorists actually giving way to cycles crossing the side road (and getting really confused when you stop to give way to them, because you are riding in the English mindset). The raised road emphasises that there is a change in priorities.

[SoreTween]

Are they going to fire all the current road design staff, and hire cyclists?

Hopefully.

(click to show/hide)

From a circus human cannon.

(click to show/hide)

Off Beachey Head

.

[nobby]

I sat as a CTC rep on a few of the local council's Highways committees.
In general the council roads officers were not cyclists, or pedestrians, and did not live in the borough. Their knowledge of the city was based on maps and site visits.
They did, however listen to us a cycling reps and also the rep from Safer Streets and there were small improvements.
I gave up on it because the local councillor assigned to the committee, allegedly a cyclist, supported the closure of a cycle lane through an underpass because, "We will be getting a Debenhams!"
The underpass was filled in and an extra lane accommodated on the ring road.
The crash of 2008 came and the development for the Debenhams didn't.

When Debenhams did arrive some years later, in an existing shopping centre, it only lasted two years and folded for lack of footfall. Doesn't compensate for the loss of the lane through the underpass but it helps.

[fd3]

I was at a Birmingham meeting standing in for FoE where they were reviewing their 1970 (IIRC) plan for cycling.  I spent a good few hours reading through the document and highlighting everything that was promised but never happened.  In the meeting they started off by laughing at all the promises they made, how could they possibly have considered doing any of that.
...
Hopefully this time it will be different, but I expect it to go the way of Boris' other plans and promises.

[nobby]

I've finally finished reading and commenting and the only thing that concerns me is what I read as an acceptance that there will be vehicles on the road with blind spots that hide vulnerable road users.
I'd have thought, but do not know, that there would be sufficient technology available to correct blind spots.

[grams]

I've finally finished reading and commenting and the only thing that concerns me is what I read as an acceptance that there will be vehicles on the road with blind spots that hide vulnerable road users.
I'd have thought, but do not know, that there would be sufficient technology available to correct blind spots.

There are no blind spots on an HGV fitted with the appropriate number of mirrors (which is a legal requirement in London), although that may introduce the problem of there being an overwhelming number of mirrors to check.

There are also cheap camera and sensor systems that more enlightened projects and companies spec out their trucks with. So blindspots are a choice.

(tbh The blindspots on HGVs with the legal minimum were massively overstated and used as an excuse for shit impatient driving the same companies that kept killing people could regularly be seen doing)