How would you improve central London Cycling?

[classic33]

Doesn't matter, to play the devil's advocate: the root cause could be deemed to be people using vulnerable, inherently unsafe vehicles such as bicycles for transportation purposes. A cyclist might lose control due to a mechanical issue or a pothole and die on an empty street, or run over by another cyclist.

Nonsense? Of course, it's all about the degree of risk. There is no way to eliminate all risk in life.

You can prove that a bicycle is an unsafe means of transport, or is that just a wild claim George.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I've been experimenting with Boris bikes to get from Paddington to Tottenham Court Road and realising how bad cycling infrastructure is in central London. My previous job was by tower bridge and that had decent segregated lanes almost all the way to Waterloo.

So how would you improve cycling in central London? Thinking within the ring formed by the main line stations - Paddington to Liverpool Street East-West, and kings cross to Waterloo/Victoria North-south

My first thought is - there are so many little roads, not much space for segregation but I think it’d be fairly straightforward to make some cycle only - so no cars at all. There are still more than enough roads around for traffic

I think you could make at least one solid east west route, and then have a few N/S links to it

Secondly the stations are really badly set up for cyclists. Waterloo has no real safe routes until you’re clear of the station - same with Paddington. They are updating Paddington at the moment for cross rail - they should include connection to cycle routes

This seems to have drifted way off topic into a kind of lunatic zone, so I thought I'd repost the OP in a vain attempt to re-stabilise it.

You can but try.

I have to admit I rarely cycle in Central London, as defined in the OP, but I do ride a lot in the suburbs. They are very different places so my experience isn't necessarily relevant. I have a regular route up to Coventry that goes bang through the middle and up the A5 to Stanmore, and I do FNRttCs, so have a few late night exits from town, but apart from that I steer clear of using a bike there.

I think the patchwork regulatory landscape, with Westminster taking a more anti-cycling approach than elsewhere, and being able to scupper integrated plans, would be a good place to start.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Central London is compact enough that cars could be removed and those last few miles replaced with cargo bikes for businesses that operate in the area. Turning it into a fantastic place to visit, instead of the grid lock, aggression, and pollution usually encountered.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Central London is compact enough that cars could be removed and those last few miles replaced with cargo bikes for businesses that operate in the area. Turning it into a fantastic place to visit, instead of the grid lock, aggression, and pollution usually encountered.

Assuming that people who actually live there can still have cars? It would be a bit rough on them to say "Would you mind parking your car over there, just a few miles away? We've built you a park and ride."

If we take "Central London" to be roughly inside the Circle Line, it's not all that compact at all. Even cutting that down to a ring: Paddington; Marylebone; Euston/KX; Liverpool St/Fenchurch St; London Bridge; Waterloo; Charing X; Victoria; back to Paddington is still a pretty huge area with a lot of residents, businesses and construction.

So I can kind of agree that yours would be a nice endpoint, but I think it's a bit ... er ... utopian. Still, no point in not thinking big.

Incidentally, I think it's already a fantastic place to visit. Just a bit rubbish to ride your bike around. But small enough to walk end to end (so maybe I take it back about it not being compact).

 

[Oldhippy]

In Tokyo, no space to park it no car. It does work.

 

[Etern4l]

You can prove that a bicycle is an unsafe means of transport, or is that just a wild claim George.

Someone said earlier that just one case of an accident involving XYZ is enough to warrant the "unsafe" designation, swiftly followed by a ban. What do you think?

Certainly, bicycles and cyclists are quite vulnerable, hence the need for (ideally separated) cycle lanes, obviously free of obstacles such as parked vehicles. Close passes and similar violations should be mercilessly prosecuted - the only way that will happen is that cyclists wear cameras, report the incidents, and any remaining police are not bogged down processing high-volume low-impact reports such as those of people sitting in traffic and texting their family to say they are running late. CCTV might get smart enough to do a lot of the relevant reporting automatically, but we are probably not quite there yet (or the solutions would not be within the budget), could be wrong! Incidents where cyclists get hurt and a car driver is at fault should be met with particularly punitive measures due to this extra vulnerability, I imagine not the case at the moment. Any officially designated bike routes (hello Grand Union Canal passing through Harlesden and similar no-go zones) should be secure, not leading through 2 feet wide dark towpaths where nobody will hear you scream. Unsafe routes should be clearly marked at such, with the signage explaining the nature of the danger, political correctness aside.

Of course, someone will jump in momentarily to argue it's all good fun out there for cyclists in London

 

[classic33]

Someone said earlier that just one case of an accident involving XYZ is enough to warrant a ban. What do you think?

Certainly, bicycles and cyclists are quite vulnerable, hence the need for (ideally separated) cycle lanes, obviously free of obstacles such as parked vehicles. Close passes and similar violations should be mercilessly prosecuted - the only way that will happen is that cyclists wear cameras and report the incidents. CCTV might get smart enough to do that automatically, but we are probably not quite there yet (or the solutions would not be within the budget), could be wrong! Incidents where cyclists get hurt and a car driver is at fault should be met with particularly punitive measures due to this extra vulnerability, I imagine not the case at the moment. Of course, someone will jump in momentarily to argue it's all good fun out there for cyclists in London

I'd come back when you are in a position to answer the question that was asked of you.

 

[slowmotion]

I have heard that the average traffic speed in central London during the daytime is a bit below 7mph. It's a wonderful environment in which to ride a bike......and it's fun.

Sorry!

 

[Ming the Merciless]

It’s odd that they joined a week ago to argue that phone use whilst driving is ok. It’s odd that they don’t think the solution to the dangers of parked cars in cycle lanes is the remove of the hazard, the parked car. Its odd that they think the space for segregated cycle lanes should come from pedestrian space when in fact that should be increased. If they are to be segregated lanes, the space for cars needs to be reduced.

Its odd that this cyclophobic has joined a cycling forum at all.

Maybe they joined in error and should have gone to

 

[Etern4l]

I'd come back when you are in a position to answer the question that was asked of you.

Please do the world a favour and don't. Welcome to my ignore list.

It’s odd that they joined a week ago to argue that phone use whilst driving is ok. It’s odd that they don’t think the solution to the dangers of parked cars in cycle lanes is the remove of the hazard, the parked car. Its odd that they think the space for segregated cycle lanes should come from pedestrian space when in fact that should be increased. If they are to be segregated lanes, the space for cars needs to be reduced.

Its odd that this cyclophobic has joined a cycling forum at all.

Maybe they joined in error and should have gone to

View attachment 631046

An obnoxious personal attack. Wrong on every count.

Prior to joining this forum I did a quick research and encountered unfavourable opinions alluding to infestation by minority trolls. Didn't take long for me to stumble into one, unfortunately. Goodbye to you too.

 

[Etern4l]

I have heard that the average traffic speed in central London during the daytime is a bit below 7mph. It's a wonderful environment in which to ride a bike......and it's fun.

Sorry!

Glad it's working for you and good luck.

 

[slowmotion]

Glad it's working for you and good luck.

Thanks. I've been knocked of my bike about half a dozen times in the last twelve years. By some miracle, I bounced each time. It's not ideal, I will admit, but I personally feel it has been a small price to pay for a lot of fun on two wheels.

 

[Dogtrousers]

This seems to have drifted way off topic into a kind of lunatic zone, so I thought I'd repost the OP in a vain attempt to re-stabilise it.

You can but try.

I did try

 

[Etern4l]

Thanks. I've been knocked of my bike about half a dozen times in the last twelve years. By some miracle, I bounced each time. It's not ideal, I will admit, but I personally feel it has been a small price to pay for a lot of fun on two wheels.

Clearly, your risk tolerance and latitude are much wider than mine - I would get banned from cycling by the second accident at the latest., and I cycled on Grand Union Canal towpaths passing through Harlesden and other a dodgy remote industrial areas for a couple of years, often at night. Different kind of risk though, and I have to say, now I would rather join you in facing black cabs on well lit roads.

 

[Etern4l]

I did try

It was a solid trolling attempt, I'll give you that. I trust you will learn all about conducting civil and open conversation from your colleagues, in the little private echo chamber space I have for you guys.