Good Cycle Infrastructure

Cycrow

Theres little point in adding more cycle paths and such if they can't actually be used by cyclists.

They are usually either full of pedestrians walking in them, or full of cars parked/driving in them.

personally i think most urban roads should be designed for pedestrian/cyclist use, and allow motor vehicles access, rather than being dominated by cars.

Then segregated cycle paths used on the out of town roads, like the fast A roads.

But the main improvement would be on driver training towards cyclists, and should be part of the driving test

Lord_Baltimore

I just can't see how 'training' is going to be enough. Accidents are, uum, accidental by definition.

We need to separate the half a ton of individually guided hurtling metal from flesh and bone or accidents and fatalities in the latter are inevitable.

No other fix will work. It's obvious but economics prevent the right decisions being taken at the top.

Cycrow

but most "accidents" with cyclists are avoidable.

And you will probably reduce the number of these accidents significantly with just one change.

Having more Patience

Lord_Baltimore

But there will still be accidents. And in those accidents cyclists will be worst off.

Patience is a virtue not a learned skill and there are motorists who don't have it and never will. Better that their impatience leads to collisions with other cars rather than a ten year old on a bike.

WiggyDiggyPoo

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

Following on from the 'why don't cyclists use cycle lanes?' thread with its links to the all-too-common crap we have in this country I thought a discussion of what we do want would be both interesting and educational, ideally with pictures.


So, any examples, or any thoughts about what YOU want from cycle infrastructure?

http://goo.gl/maps/2x0yH

Hopefully that will work, this stretch of road is a 50 mph limit dual carriageway (maybe national) that has a fully segregated cycle lane. Its shared with a footpath for about 3/4 of a mile then becomes exclusively for cycles. Does a good job of separating me from one of the busiest and fastest roads in my area. Its interesting to note in the opposite direction you have a more traditional on road cycle lane, but given the traffic at commuting times is almost permanently backed up its less of an issue to be separated.

Also Google 'Leeds Cycle Superhighway'. There's a lot of money and good work going into creating an excellent cycling route between Leeds and Bradford.

Generali

Wide shared use paths is the way forward IMHO. That's what a lot of provision in Sydney is and it works really well.

Yes you have to keep your speed down a bit but you retain right of way at junctions by-and-large and nothing slows you down quite as much as being hit by a truck!

Marco_Panettone

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

I just can't see how 'training' is going to be enough. Accidents are, uum, accidental by definition.

We need to separate the half a ton of individually guided hurtling metal from flesh and bone or accidents and fatalities in the latter are inevitable.

No other fix will work. It's obvious but economics prevent the right decisions being taken at the top.

Training ON ITS OWN won't be enough. Segregation on every road isn't possible, so there will be times where motor vehicles and cycles will be using the same roads at the same time. We already physically separate motor vehicles and pedestrians, but there are still too many pedestrian deaths on our roads.

Marco_Panettone

Generali wrote: »

Wide shared use paths is the way forward IMHO. That's what a lot of provision in Sydney is and it works really well.

Yes you have to keep your speed down a bit but you retain right of way at junctions by-and-large and nothing slows you down quite as much as being hit by a truck!

Why is that not ok for motorists on shared roads, but ok for cyclists on shared paths?

Generali

Marco_Panettone wrote: »

Why is that not ok for motorists on shared roads, but ok for cyclists on shared paths?

It is ok for motorists to keep their speed down. Who said it wasn't?

They are obliged to in city centres and residential areas for example.

andrewf75

Cycrow wrote: »

personally i think most urban roads should be designed for pedestrian/cyclist use, and allow motor vehicles access, rather than being dominated by cars.

Then segregated cycle paths used on the out of town roads, like the fast A roads.

This.

And segregated cycle paths should be integrated into junctions rather than just stopping as is currently the case.

I'd also build cross country cycle paths between towns/business parks/rail stations etc for commuters.

I would invest billions. Whatever it cost it would pay for itself when you consider health benefits and easing of congestion.