London Cyclists: Boris Cycling Policy Verdict
Discussion
Dear PH PP Londoners,
This is a fun thread to evaluate how you think Boris Johnson's cycling policy is doing. Here are my thoughts:
Cycle Super Highways
Massive let-down. Not only are these more "paint on the roads" they are spectacularly poor examples of "paint on the roads".
Have a look at this 6-month-old example in Clapham. It's literally falling to pieces, and cars cannot drive down the road without driving in the cycle lane! Where are the flyovers and segregation from traffic that was promised?
Verdict: Own Goal.
Barclays Bike Hire
Loss-making but hugely popular and works very well. How they ever thought it was going to make money I don't know, but they have done a comprehensive job on the implementation. The bikes are fun too! But how much did it cost? What could this money have bought cyclists in terms off improved cycle lanes and storage/security facilities?
Verdict: Off the crossbar.
General Promotion of Cycling
There is a noticeable increase in the numbers of people on two wheels. The mayor himself isn't all talk and no cycle-clips: he genuinely gets out there and rides himself.
Verdict: Goal!
What are your thoughts?
This is a fun thread to evaluate how you think Boris Johnson's cycling policy is doing. Here are my thoughts:
Cycle Super Highways
Massive let-down. Not only are these more "paint on the roads" they are spectacularly poor examples of "paint on the roads".
Have a look at this 6-month-old example in Clapham. It's literally falling to pieces, and cars cannot drive down the road without driving in the cycle lane! Where are the flyovers and segregation from traffic that was promised?
Verdict: Own Goal.
Barclays Bike Hire
Loss-making but hugely popular and works very well. How they ever thought it was going to make money I don't know, but they have done a comprehensive job on the implementation. The bikes are fun too! But how much did it cost? What could this money have bought cyclists in terms off improved cycle lanes and storage/security facilities?
Verdict: Off the crossbar.
General Promotion of Cycling
There is a noticeable increase in the numbers of people on two wheels. The mayor himself isn't all talk and no cycle-clips: he genuinely gets out there and rides himself.
Verdict: Goal!
What are your thoughts?
Mr Gear said:
Dear PH PP Londoners,
This is a fun thread to evaluate how you think Boris Johnson's cycling policy is doing. Here are my thoughts:
Cycle Super Highways
Massive let-down. Not only are these more "paint on the roads" they are spectacularly poor examples of "paint on the roads".
Have a look at this 6-month-old example in Clapham. It's literally falling to pieces, and cars cannot drive down the road without driving in the cycle lane! Where are the flyovers and segregation from traffic that was promised?
Verdict: Own Goal.
Barclays Bike Hire
Loss-making but hugely popular and works very well. How they ever thought it was going to make money I don't know, but they have done a comprehensive job on the implementation. The bikes are fun too! But how much did it cost? What could this money have bought cyclists in terms off improved cycle lanes and storage/security facilities?
Verdict: Off the crossbar.
General Promotion of Cycling
There is a noticeable increase in the numbers of people on two wheels. The mayor himself isn't all talk and no cycle-clips: he genuinely gets out there and rides himself.
Verdict: Goal!
What are your thoughts?
Disagree on Cycle Superhighway.This is a fun thread to evaluate how you think Boris Johnson's cycling policy is doing. Here are my thoughts:
Cycle Super Highways
Massive let-down. Not only are these more "paint on the roads" they are spectacularly poor examples of "paint on the roads".
Have a look at this 6-month-old example in Clapham. It's literally falling to pieces, and cars cannot drive down the road without driving in the cycle lane! Where are the flyovers and segregation from traffic that was promised?
Verdict: Own Goal.
Barclays Bike Hire
Loss-making but hugely popular and works very well. How they ever thought it was going to make money I don't know, but they have done a comprehensive job on the implementation. The bikes are fun too! But how much did it cost? What could this money have bought cyclists in terms off improved cycle lanes and storage/security facilities?
Verdict: Off the crossbar.
General Promotion of Cycling
There is a noticeable increase in the numbers of people on two wheels. The mayor himself isn't all talk and no cycle-clips: he genuinely gets out there and rides himself.
Verdict: Goal!
What are your thoughts?
1. They are a lot more fun to ride on as they naturally create groups of cyclists.
2. As a result of above they make it a little safer.
3. I don't want segregated lanes - they invariably mean hundreds of give ways at side roads plus lots of debris in the bike lane.
I really cannot think of a single negative about them - pehaps apart from the bizarre detour round Elephant & Castle.
Disagree on Boris bikes:
1. How does money spent on increased bike storage and other facilities help those who don't already bring their bike into town?
2. It is much easier when doing a quick errand about town to take a Boris bike out rather than your own bike as you then don't need to bother carrying locks and they are better when wearing a suit than our own bikes.
3. Is it really loss making? Maybe directly as a scheme it is - but what if you include the benefits to less congestion, lower health costs, increased admission to tourist attractions that aren't close to tube stations?
Barclays Cycle Hire is Jekyll and Hyde for me, after a month of trying to use it whenever I can.
With a key, it works pretty well. Sometimes bikes don't reveal they are out of service until you try to release them, so the station with say 2 red light bikes and two no-light bikes becomes four red light bikes once you try to release them.
That said, the key or comms system seems unreliable, so a red light might mean the bike is out of service OR their system is overloaded and can't authorise requests for some reason..
As a casual user, it can be a horrible experience, mainly for similar reasons as above; except your printed code expires after 10mins and can't be used at other stations, but it seems once you have requested a code and not released a bike, the system blocks my card and refuses to print any more codes even at other stations! Also the system seems to get overloaded at peak times and the docks / screens stop working or 'timeout' when you try to do a payment.
Also the docking stations at mainline stations are not cleared at peak evening (missed a few trains because of this) and busy stations eg. Oxford St are never replenished once empty. iirc they used to do this at the beginning but don't anymore.
I like the scheme as a whole but the Serco implementation is terrible.
With a key, it works pretty well. Sometimes bikes don't reveal they are out of service until you try to release them, so the station with say 2 red light bikes and two no-light bikes becomes four red light bikes once you try to release them.
That said, the key or comms system seems unreliable, so a red light might mean the bike is out of service OR their system is overloaded and can't authorise requests for some reason..
As a casual user, it can be a horrible experience, mainly for similar reasons as above; except your printed code expires after 10mins and can't be used at other stations, but it seems once you have requested a code and not released a bike, the system blocks my card and refuses to print any more codes even at other stations! Also the system seems to get overloaded at peak times and the docks / screens stop working or 'timeout' when you try to do a payment.
Also the docking stations at mainline stations are not cleared at peak evening (missed a few trains because of this) and busy stations eg. Oxford St are never replenished once empty. iirc they used to do this at the beginning but don't anymore.
I like the scheme as a whole but the Serco implementation is terrible.
oyster said:
Disagree on Cycle Superhighway.
1. They are a lot more fun to ride on as they naturally create groups of cyclists.
2. As a result of above they make it a little safer.
3. I don't want segregated lanes - they invariably mean hundreds of give ways at side roads plus lots of debris in the bike lane.
I really cannot think of a single negative about them - pehaps apart from the bizarre detour round Elephant & Castle.
Disagree on Boris bikes:
1. How does money spent on increased bike storage and other facilities help those who don't already bring their bike into town?
2. It is much easier when doing a quick errand about town to take a Boris bike out rather than your own bike as you then don't need to bother carrying locks and they are better when wearing a suit than our own bikes.
3. Is it really loss making? Maybe directly as a scheme it is - but what if you include the benefits to less congestion, lower health costs, increased admission to tourist attractions that aren't close to tube stations?
This thread is supposed to generate debate, so I take no offence that you disagree with me. It's fair to say that the quality of the Cycle Superhighways varies enormously. The one in the photo in Clapham is spectacularly s1. They are a lot more fun to ride on as they naturally create groups of cyclists.
2. As a result of above they make it a little safer.
3. I don't want segregated lanes - they invariably mean hundreds of give ways at side roads plus lots of debris in the bike lane.
I really cannot think of a single negative about them - pehaps apart from the bizarre detour round Elephant & Castle.
Disagree on Boris bikes:
1. How does money spent on increased bike storage and other facilities help those who don't already bring their bike into town?
2. It is much easier when doing a quick errand about town to take a Boris bike out rather than your own bike as you then don't need to bother carrying locks and they are better when wearing a suit than our own bikes.
3. Is it really loss making? Maybe directly as a scheme it is - but what if you include the benefits to less congestion, lower health costs, increased admission to tourist attractions that aren't close to tube stations?
t, but a couple of miles up the road in Oval and they have made some useful improvements.However, we were promised uninterrupted and segregated highways into London... alongside train lines and along newly-closed roads. Proper "highways" where cyclists had right of way, making your point "3" invalid. I haven't seen anything like that anywhere.
Mr Gear said:
oyster said:
Disagree on Cycle Superhighway.
1. They are a lot more fun to ride on as they naturally create groups of cyclists.
2. As a result of above they make it a little safer.
3. I don't want segregated lanes - they invariably mean hundreds of give ways at side roads plus lots of debris in the bike lane.
I really cannot think of a single negative about them - pehaps apart from the bizarre detour round Elephant & Castle.
Disagree on Boris bikes:
1. How does money spent on increased bike storage and other facilities help those who don't already bring their bike into town?
2. It is much easier when doing a quick errand about town to take a Boris bike out rather than your own bike as you then don't need to bother carrying locks and they are better when wearing a suit than our own bikes.
3. Is it really loss making? Maybe directly as a scheme it is - but what if you include the benefits to less congestion, lower health costs, increased admission to tourist attractions that aren't close to tube stations?
This thread is supposed to generate debate, so I take no offence that you disagree with me. It's fair to say that the quality of the Cycle Superhighways varies enormously. The one in the photo in Clapham is spectacularly s1. They are a lot more fun to ride on as they naturally create groups of cyclists.
2. As a result of above they make it a little safer.
3. I don't want segregated lanes - they invariably mean hundreds of give ways at side roads plus lots of debris in the bike lane.
I really cannot think of a single negative about them - pehaps apart from the bizarre detour round Elephant & Castle.
Disagree on Boris bikes:
1. How does money spent on increased bike storage and other facilities help those who don't already bring their bike into town?
2. It is much easier when doing a quick errand about town to take a Boris bike out rather than your own bike as you then don't need to bother carrying locks and they are better when wearing a suit than our own bikes.
3. Is it really loss making? Maybe directly as a scheme it is - but what if you include the benefits to less congestion, lower health costs, increased admission to tourist attractions that aren't close to tube stations?
t, but a couple of miles up the road in Oval and they have made some useful improvements.However, we were promised uninterrupted and segregated highways into London... alongside train lines and along newly-closed roads. Proper "highways" where cyclists had right of way, making your point "3" invalid. I haven't seen anything like that anywhere.
The problem is, I know my mum (or a lot of other occasional cyclists) would be terrified on them. Never mind that they are safer than pavement based ones, she wouldn't feel safe.
So the question is, who should they be designed for? Those who already cycle, or those who might if things were changed?
I started cycling to work 6 weeks ago. The second half of my route includes all but a mile or so of CS7, and I think it is a resounding success.
Yes, it's not absolutely perfect, but the OP's photo shows the worst part of the route by a good few orders of magnitude.
I find that motorists are far, far more respectful of it than any other cycle lane I've ever used; in fact, it amazes me the extent to which it is respected given how busy the road is. I think much of this is down to the sheer volume of cyclists - other users now seem to work on the basis that they can't swerve into the lane, because there will be bikes there.
I certainly wouldn't want a fully segregated route, not only for the reasons stated by other posters, but also because I just cannot begin to imagine how they could build a segregated route and then make it wide enough for us to do anything other than ride at the speed of the slowest in rush hour. It's not unusual to be one of three or even four cyclists abreast, all passing each other at various speeds. At present, this can happen perfectly safely by extending into the rest of the bus lane or the road when there is space. It couldn't happen on a segregated path, and would just lead to cyclists using the road out of frustration.
The one really big thing that I would change is to make the surface rougher. It's all well and good having that lovely, smooth, shiny surface to zoom along with next to no rolling resistance, but you'd find shorter stopping distances on your local ice rink than you did on Clapham High Street yesterday morning!
Overall, I think it's a resounding success, and without doubt the best possible compromise between improving the lot of cyclists and using up vast pots of money which could be better spent elsewhere. The fact that cycling increased on CS3 & CS7 by an average of 70% over the first year would suggest that quite a few people agree.
Lastly, based on Soovy's comment, it would appear that the female cyclists on CS7 have an altogether better class of arse than those on CS3!
Yes, it's not absolutely perfect, but the OP's photo shows the worst part of the route by a good few orders of magnitude.
I find that motorists are far, far more respectful of it than any other cycle lane I've ever used; in fact, it amazes me the extent to which it is respected given how busy the road is. I think much of this is down to the sheer volume of cyclists - other users now seem to work on the basis that they can't swerve into the lane, because there will be bikes there.
I certainly wouldn't want a fully segregated route, not only for the reasons stated by other posters, but also because I just cannot begin to imagine how they could build a segregated route and then make it wide enough for us to do anything other than ride at the speed of the slowest in rush hour. It's not unusual to be one of three or even four cyclists abreast, all passing each other at various speeds. At present, this can happen perfectly safely by extending into the rest of the bus lane or the road when there is space. It couldn't happen on a segregated path, and would just lead to cyclists using the road out of frustration.
The one really big thing that I would change is to make the surface rougher. It's all well and good having that lovely, smooth, shiny surface to zoom along with next to no rolling resistance, but you'd find shorter stopping distances on your local ice rink than you did on Clapham High Street yesterday morning!
Overall, I think it's a resounding success, and without doubt the best possible compromise between improving the lot of cyclists and using up vast pots of money which could be better spent elsewhere. The fact that cycling increased on CS3 & CS7 by an average of 70% over the first year would suggest that quite a few people agree.
Lastly, based on Soovy's comment, it would appear that the female cyclists on CS7 have an altogether better class of arse than those on CS3!
Mr Gear said:
Dear PH PP Londoners,
This is a fun thread to evaluate how you think Boris Johnson's cycling policy is doing. Here are my thoughts:
Cycle Super Highways
Massive let-down. Not only are these more "paint on the roads" they are spectacularly poor examples of "paint on the roads".
Have a look at this 6-month-old example in Clapham. It's literally falling to pieces, and cars cannot drive down the road without driving in the cycle lane! Where are the flyovers and segregation from traffic that was promised?
Verdict: Own Goal.
Now fully resurfaced.This is a fun thread to evaluate how you think Boris Johnson's cycling policy is doing. Here are my thoughts:
Cycle Super Highways
Massive let-down. Not only are these more "paint on the roads" they are spectacularly poor examples of "paint on the roads".
Have a look at this 6-month-old example in Clapham. It's literally falling to pieces, and cars cannot drive down the road without driving in the cycle lane! Where are the flyovers and segregation from traffic that was promised?
Verdict: Own Goal.
Big plus point = lovely smooth tarmac
Small minus point = they haven't repainted the blue lane onto it.
Kermit power said:
Now fully resurfaced.
Big plus point = lovely smooth tarmac
Small minus point = they haven't repainted the blue lane onto it.
I'll be testing it next week. But I suspect that the blue paint (even if it does return) will still be driven on by cars, buses and lorries due to the narrow nature of the road at that point.Big plus point = lovely smooth tarmac
Small minus point = they haven't repainted the blue lane onto it.
Mr Gear said:
I'll be testing it next week. But I suspect that the blue paint (even if it does return) will still be driven on by cars, buses and lorries due to the narrow nature of the road at that point.
Which I think is probably why they haven't repainted it. With a bit of reflection, I think this probably makes sense, as there's no point having cyclists sailing through thinking they have absolute right of way when wider vehicles can't give it to them.Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff