I’ve read the article and scan read this thread and I’m still struggling to see this as anything but a bad idea. It’s a (relatively) simple thing to implement that doesn’t even begin to address the root problems. Maybe I’d have a different outlook if I was a cycle commuter in a big city.

I think the main problem with this is that once you start to give priority to one group of road users over another on some routes, the group affected is going to demand something in return. If this actually happens (which it won’t), how long will it be before the motoring lobby starts demanding that cyclists be banned from A-roads or other major urban arteries?

It’s a terrible idea.

What we need are proper cycle lanes segregated from the road or places where cars are banned completely.

What happens if a cyclist overtakes doing more than 15mph ?

15mph is really really slow, motorisits will easily and inadvertently exceed the limit, some will be fined and it will further damage the relationship between cyclists and motorists. There will be a huge backlash against cyclists breaking the law, eg no lights, ignoring traffic lights, not giving way on pedestrian crossings.

If this actually happens (which it won’t)

It happens it Brussels (without the fines as far as I know) and it appears to work sufficiently well that the scheme is being extended

The trouble is in Brussels people are sensible and have a modicum of patience (I presume). In this country drivers think their journey is more important than everyone else’s, that the 20 seconds they’ll save by overtaking a cyclist is a matter of life and death, and a cyclist overtaking them is akin to the worst kind of queue jumping. It really is a bizarre mentality.

It really is a bizarre mentality.

That’s the main problem. Here is a scheme that asks for cyclists to be treated with a bit of respect and even dares to suggest they be treated equally to cars and lots of people are up in arms.

15mph is really really slow

It’s well above the average speed in central London.

All for making cycling safer on the roads, but another Act to take money off motorists?

Motorist will just look at it as another way of the Gov. getting money off them.

That’s the main problem. Here is a scheme that asks for cyclists to be treated with a bit of respect and even dares to suggest they be treated equally to cars and lots of people are up in arms.

No it doesn’t its using “Cyclist safety” as a pretext to fine motorists, is it really impossible to design roads where two modes of transport, which typically operate at in speed ranges, can move past one another?

Do we actually have to penalise either group in order to bring about a bit of “Respect”?

Ultimately we should stop cramming people into the South East congesting the roads, and then make petrol So chuffing expensive that cycling is the only ecconomically sensible option for people who aren’t Kagillionaires: apply Chris Rock’s Gun control model to Britsh motoring…

[video]http://youtu.be/Db0Y4qIZ4PA[/video]

Sod all this fines for overtaking cobblers.

and then make petrol So chuffing expensive that cycling is the only ecconomically sensible option for people who aren’t Kagillionaires

Oh dear.
🙁

Well if we’re going to extremes that will never happen, I thought I’d propose one… 😉

Do we actually have to penalise either group in order to bring about a bit of “Respect”?

Like I said, the mentality of people in this country is one of required instant gratification and a misplaced sense of priority over other people’s needs. Combine this with a government and local councils with an ingrained authoritarian streak and you get proposals like this which treat everyone as if they’re children.

It’s well above the average speed in central London.

@nickjb – the average speed in London is low (11mph?) because of all the buses and traffic lights. If you make the max speed you can drive in London 15mph then with the traffic lights/buses the average will be what, 6 or 7mph ?

If they implement this there will a tsunami of public opinion to have cyclists wear helmets, high viz jackets and those with a driving licence have fines and penalty points for jumping the lights etc.

when car drivers get pissed at cyclists filterin

Driving pissed is illegal anyway

If you make the max speed you can drive in London 15mph then with the traffic lights/buses the average will be what, 6 or 7mph ?

care to show your working out on that one?

jambalaya – Member

If you make the max speed you can drive in London 15mph then…

that’s not what’s being proposed – so don’t worry about it.

How about:

the average speed in London is low (11mph?) because of all the buses and traffic lights. . If you make the max speed you can drive in London 15mph then with the traffic lights/buses the average will be what, 6 or 7mph ?traffic might actually flow better. It’ll certainly be safer for more vulnerable road users

😀

What might help me is if somebody could suggest one or two,roads in central London that they think this could sensibly be of use on, and why. I’m struggling, tbh.

Another idea, which is so simple it will never be implemented;

Put bollards half way along all but designated through routes.

Local residents get an improved standard of life, with no through traffic outside their houses in exchange for the minor inconvenience of only being able to access their house from one end of the road.

Cyclists get an almost traffic free route down the back streets, if they choose.

Emergency vehicles can be fitted with sensors to lower the bollards, much like buses and some bus lanes now, giving them an option to avoid the traffic jams on the normal through routes.

No need for enforcement. Bollards tend to be self enforcing. 🙂

It’ll probably come as no surprise that I think this is a very good thing. (Handy since Newcastle is one of the trial areas).

To be clear, we’re not talking about slowing an A-road to 15mph.

I think we’re talking about city streets where, ideally, you might want to remove cars entirely and make it pedestrian/cycle access, but that isn’t practical for various reasons (e.g. locals objecting, genuine need for residential access, shops requiring loading access, or just too big a step politically etc).

I’d rather they went the whole hog and removed motor traffic entirely from such city centre streets (as other cycle-friendly cities manage to do) but this is a good step, if only because it gets drivers used to the idea that they don’t have priority.

Yes, Enforcement would be a major issue.

Some of this can be handled by design (e.g. ensuring the streets do not offer through-roads for drivers; clear signing and road surfacing; use of street furniture and trees to create a pedstrianised feel etc) but ultimately it’ll need some legal enforcement too if the UK’s drivers are to understand it.

My impression was that this was going to be used as a way of making rat run residential streets less attractive.

Yes, that’s how I saw it as well.
I’ve never liked the idea of cyclists being used as mobile bollards for traffic calming though.

Emergency vehicles can be fitted with sensors to lower the bollards

It’s good but those lowering bollards are mighty expensive and require maintenance.

And they are not foolproof enough for UK drivers:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_Cw0QJU8ro[/video]

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0wY-hvMC44[/video]

My impression was that this was going to be used as a way of making rat run residential streets less attractive.

If that’s the case then I’d say “Works in Netherlands”.

Woonerf (“Living Streets”) are designed to be nice places for residents and used at walking pace. There are cars, but no through roads and traffic is slow.
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/search/label/woonerf

Notable also that Hembrow reckons the Shared Space concept has been tried and failed. But I suspect we’ll have to make that mistake for ourselves.
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2008/11/shared-space.html

Oh man I love those bus bollard things. That bit where the horrible Porsche SUV gets its engine smashed in is just beautiful, beautiful. 😀

Also: I am totally in favour of slowing motorists down to 15mph on some streets, but I’m not entirely keen on the idea of using cyclists as rolling human speed-bumps to do it. Perhaps the police could start out by properly enforcing the rules we do have first, rather than adding some more for everyone to ignore.

I’m not entirely keen on the idea of using cyclists as rolling human speed-bumps to do it.

It doesn’t have to be done like that. Removing through traffic, removing kerbs, adding street furniture, etc.

Janette Sadik-Khan explains it far more eloquently than I can:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LujWrkYsl64[/video]

If they can do that in New York then why not here?

If they can do that in New York then why not here?

Wow, that’s pretty amazing, I had no idea they’d done that sort of thing in NY. Good on ’em.

Not sure it’d help tbh – speed limits/speed humps/solid white lines/ASLs etc etc get routinely ignored now anyway – can’t see how a new law would change behaviour.

More enforcement of existing laws and proper consequences would be better.

Maybe the copper standing by the Oval junction yesterday morning looking right at a car stopped in the ASL, but doing absolutely nothing about it – could become an illusion rather than reality!

Not sure it’d help tbh – speed limits/speed humps/solid white lines/ASLs etc etc get routinely ignored now anyway – can’t see how a new law would change behaviour.

It won’t.

Good road design informs and enforces behaviour, the change in law just gives that design some legal backing.

The design of these roads should be such that drivers don’t expect to be able to drive fast on them (e.g. think about driving through a semi-pedestrianised area).

That’s the Dutch approach I believe.

Sign says “Bike Street: Cars Are Guests”

A colleague of mine rides a scooter/moped to work. He shares similar thoughts about car drivers. Even been spat on apparently…

The problem is more than just how to improve cycling provision, it’s more about the lack of basic empathy shown by people when they get in cars… this story shocked me…

Revving at pedestrians = dead grandmother

Revving at pedestrians = dead grandmother

but hey atleast revving your engine at people on a crossing speeding and giving people the evils instead of watching where you are going isn’t dangerous driving, merely careless. One does wonder what you have to do to make it dangerous, juggling flaming torches while driving?

I can only think that the grandmother was not using the crossing (article doesn’t make it clear) otherwise it’s a big WTF from me.

“banned from driving for two years and ordered to take an extended driving test”

😕

As I always say, I can’t understand why anyone convicted of death by careless or dangerous driving is EVER allowed to drive again.

Cars are dangerous machines which they have clearly demonstrated they cannot be trusted to operate. Why would you give them another go?