Good thread and interesting reading. I have to agree I'm another one that thinks that particular bus stop design pictured upthread is very bad and am surprised any cycling organisation would think it a good idea. It does'nt seem to be acceptable to bus passengers or cyclists. Did the trials contain pensioners and children? And I thought well designed cycle infrastructure could be used by new and experienced cyclists alike, but the cyclists on here seem against it, it seems to increase the liklihood of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists. Like many others I'd avoid that and continue with the motorised traffic. That does'nt seem a sound design model. Jane how did your 'sort of road planning meeting along CSH4' go? Any updates?
We're told the current system has'nt recruited the required/desired number of cyclists (whatever this magic number is?) and that segregation is the answer. Our road network has been over 100 years in the making, and lots of it followed much older routes going back many 100's if not 1000's of years. So developing any sizeable network is not going to happen overnight, or over a short period of time, I think most people realise that. But I concede you've got to start somewhere. But lets at least try and make any modifications to the existing network decent ones, otherwise we're just repeating the tokenistic inadequate cycle routes of the past, which frankly I see enough of already.
I've seen figures that decent cycling infrastructure costs between £200k and £1m per km, and in these penny pinching times that sounds a lot. And thats before any extra costs like all the extra storing and locking facilities for all these potential new cyclists' bikes. I know in terms of the rumoured costs of projects such HS2 that's loose change, but I've not seen any figures banded around of what the LCC proposes as a sufficient budget to make its dream come true, and realistically what the chances are of getting that. I think the LCC needs to return to reality a little and concede that at best its going to happen in small steps over the course of many years. That being the case, here and now in the real world, I find it a bit puzzling that there is such vehement opposition to cycle training. We are regularly told fear and intimidation is one of the reasons that deters potential new cyclists, but even with segregation are'nt these novice cyclists also going to be intimidated by cycling along with very large numbers of other cyclists? I consider myself a competent cyclist but cycling CS7 in rush hour roulettte, in the current 'not enough cyclists' climate, can be a hellish experience. I honestly feel I'm more likely to be taken out by another cyclist than I am by any motor traffic. I know training is percieved by some as being a skillset that needs acquiring and as such is another barrier to cycling, but not being able to ride a bike is a barrier to cycling but that does'nt mean we should'nt teach anyone to learn. I cannot see something that better equips cyclists to deal with the roads as they are now as bad thing.
I agree wholeheartedly with the poster who said its being presented in binary terms. There have been personal attacks by some LCC members that leave a nasty aftertaste (not in this thread particularly but the discussion in general), and the debate seems to be framed in terms of having to be in one camp or the other, rather than having elements of both. It all seems a bit one dimensional. There's has not been enough talk in the wider debate of other points that will make a positive contribution, such as actual enforcement of 20mph zones, the HGV issue, maybe change traffic light phasing to give priority to cyclists, increased prosecutions of drivers who runover cyclists etc.
For the record I've not done cycle training nor am I a member of the LCC or CTC, I come from a bigger group, I'm simply a cyclist.
