Blackfriars Bridge redeisgn

[User]

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

The Cyclists In The City blog - http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.com/ - has been excellent on this.

A summary post is here - http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.com/2011/03/blackfriars-consultation-now-open-until.html

 

[Adasta]

Not sure if anyone would've seen this.

 

[dellzeqq]

unfortunately the design for CS5 going north of Vauxhall Bridge has the same fault.

I don't think of myself as a nervous cyclist, but going north past the left filter lane at Drummond Gate isn't my idea of fun. The new CS5 design keeps the filter lane, and has the blue stripe one lane in - effectively giving us the very design that did for Vicky McCreery at Blackfriars.

 

[style over speed]

the lcc are twitering this:


Blackfriars Bridge redesign protest flashmob - Friday 8.30am


http://ibikelondon.blogspot.com/2011/05/flash-ride-for-blackfriars-bridge.html

 

[dellzeqq]

this is a considerable victory for the LCC, and one cannot begrudge them celebrating it, but the junction will still be rammed after the changes and the southbound cycle lane is really no improvement on the present 'temporary' situation.

I came down from Mount Pleasant this evening at about 6.20, and the traffic was stationary. Some cyclists were filtering through, and you had to admire their nerve. This situation is by no means unusual.

The solution, and it's not difficult to spot, is to make the southward bus lane continuous, linking the section above Fleet Street with the section on the bridge. No need to reduce the footpath, no need for a cycle lane. Banning left turns toward Cannon Street would be good. Sadly we have a mayor who doesn't believe in bus lanes, and reducing the non-bus traffic to one lane was never an option.

So - well done to the LCC. It's just a pity that the result is so poor.

 

[style over speed]

this is a considerable victory for the LCC, and one cannot begrudge them celebrating it, but the junction will still be rammed after the changes and the southbound cycle lane is really no improvement on the present 'temporary' situation.

I came down from Mount Pleasant this evening at about 6.20, and the traffic was stationary. Some cyclists were filtering through, and you had to admire their nerve. This situation is by no means unusual.

The solution, and it's not difficult to spot, is to make the southward bus lane continuous, linking the section above Fleet Street with the section on the bridge. No need to reduce the footpath, no need for a cycle lane. Banning left turns toward Cannon Street would be good. Sadly we have a mayor who doesn't believe in bus lanes, and reducing the non-bus traffic to one lane was never an option.

So - well done to the LCC. It's just a pity that the result is so poor.

isn't the flash mob protest because the result is so poor, AFAIKS its not a celeb?

 

[dellzeqq]

However you look at it the redesign is a considerable result for the LCC. They got the cycle lane back again. They failed on the 20mph restriction, but that's do-able after the next Mayoral election.

18th May 2011

Blackfriars Bridge: success for cyclists
The mayor has said that he will keep the cycle lane on Blackfriars Bridge,
but not introduce a 20mph limit. The original plans put forward by Transport
for London propsed taking out the southbound cycle lane and replacing it
with an extra lane for motorised traffic.

Jenny Jones said:
“This is a real victory for cyclists who wish to use this bridge safely. But
the scheme will still not fully recognise that more cyclists use this bridge
in the morning peak than cars and taxis. The Mayor has rejected the idea of
a 20mph limit across the bridge, which is an obvious way to make it safer
for cyclists, who account for almost three quarters of the injuries on this
bridge.”

The Standard is impressed http://lydall.standa...ting-force.html

I'm afraid I'm of the view that the cycle lane is a waste of space, and that a 24 hour continuous bus lane would have been better all round. But hats off to the LCC.

 

[Richard Mann]

Transport models can't cope with traffic evaporation, so in practice you have to treat it politically, remind them that their models are inadequate and reclaim space in stages. Continuous cycle lanes are the first stage.

20mph wouldn't have had much effect (given the multi-lane road). A bus lane will be the next step, maybe when there's a more bus-friendly administration.

 

[dellzeqq]

Transport models can't cope with traffic evaporation, so in practice you have to treat it politically, remind them that their models are inadequate and reclaim space in stages. Continuous cycle lanes are the first stage.

20mph wouldn't have had much effect (given the multi-lane road). A bus lane will be the next step, maybe when there's a more bus-friendly administration.

I see where you're coming from. Unfortunately - see thread on Vauxhall - discussion on Transport Evaporation is banned at TfL. I take your point about the 20mph thing as well - I think that's entirely political thing, and it's understandable that the Greens wanted to set a precedent, or to capitalise on the almost-precedent of Tower Bridge. I do think, however, that the southbound bus lane north of the bridge could have been done, should have been done and will be done some time after 2012

Richard - I'm sure you're across the Mysterious Case of the Hammersmith Bridge Closure. Not to mention the Equally Mysterious Case of the Sinking of Battersea Bridge. It seems to me that the advantage of Transport Evaporation is that, if the political will is there, you can suck it and see. Make Putney High Street or even Streatham High Road a bus lane and see what happens.....

 

[Richard Mann]

...discussion on Transport Evaporation is banned at TfL...

Just keep reminding them that their models don't include it, fully 10 years after Phil Goodwin identified that they should. There are perfectly good reasons why they don't - the models are complicated/expensive enough already. But they need to remember to present their model results with appropriate doses of salt - as indications of concern, rather than absolute reasons for inaction. Keep them honest!

 

[Tommi]

Does anyone happen to know how exactly TfL balances between conflicting goals, e.g. how many 'stacked' cars is worth more than discouraging cycling? I'm assuming "encouraging cycling" is a real goal and not just empty words, so the numbers should be heavily favouring the alternative when you go against other objectives, right? I've tried asking TfL and London Assembly members a few times, but no one seems to like to share.

 

[dellzeqq]

Does anyone happen to know how exactly TfL balances between conflicting goals, e.g. how many 'stacked' cars is worth more than discouraging cycling? I'm assuming "encouraging cycling" is a real goal and not just empty words, so the numbers should be heavily favouring the alternative when you go against other objectives, right? I've tried asking TfL and London Assembly members a few times, but no one seems to like to share.

I did attend a conference (well, actually an orgy of self-congratulation) at which David Brown suggested that all things being equal all the waiting times should be equal.

 

[Origamist]

Tories do it like the RMT and walk out!

UPDATE 2pm: the London Assembly was barred from debating the motion (and another on air quality) when the Tory group walked out en masse - rendering the meeting inquorate. It's not the first time that the Tories have performed this trick - making a nonsense of the fact they're each paid at least £53,439.

Jenny Jones said she respected the Tories' right to "strike" - but said it was hypocritical when the party was trying to deny Tube workers a similar right. She added: "It does stop us debating things that Londoners care about."

The motion notes that the Corporation of London is considering limiting all roads within the Square Mile to 20mph and adds: “We ask the Mayor to reconsider his rejection of a 20 mph limit on Blackfriars Bridge, in the interests of the safety of all its users.”

http://lydall.standard.co.uk/

 

[sheddy]

Does this confirm my suspicion that Tories generally care nothing about Road Safety ?

from road cc http://road.cc/conte...ory-gla-walkout