Conservatives talking about a cycle lane network in Reading

[another_dave_b]

Conservatives are making cycling, or rather cycle lanes, an election issue in Reading.

Quote below taken from the Reading Evening Post:

Reading Conservatives have promised to get cyclists off shared footpaths and on to separate cycle lanes.

They announced their plans at the Reading Cycle annual meeting on Friday, April 4.

Transport spokesman for the Conservatives on Reading Borough Council, Councillor Richard Willis, also promised to establish a Cycle Forum to meet at least quarterly if his party gains power after the elections on Thursday, May 1.

He said there would also be a designated cycling officer reporting to the head of transport.

Cllr Willis said: “For too long, cycling has been an afterthought in the council’s plans. I want to achieve a modal shift to cycling for all the benefits of reduced congestion and pollution, as well as the health benefits for the cyclist.

“However, we will only achieve this if cyclists are given a higher priority in the design of new road schemes and if people feel it is safe and convenient to get out of their cars and cycle.”

Cllr Willis said he was a keen cyclist before moving to Reading but a few trips on his bike had convinced him of the dangers of cycling in the town.

The Reading Cycle meeting was also attended by Tory councillors Mike Townend, Isobel Ballsdon and Tim Harris.

Cllr Ballsdon, environment spokeswoman for the party, said: “Shortly we will launch our cycling strategy which will set out specific plans to make Reading a cycling town, where cycling is the natural choice for those that are able.

“In a compact and relatively flat urban area, it has to be possible to improve on the present council’s shameful record.

“Reading still has no substantive cycling strategy and until it is a higher priority, cyclists will continue to be forced off the roads and on to pavements or into their cars.”

I think Reading has a big problem with people cycling on the pavement, so I'm very much in favour of this.

Where cycle lanes currently exist in Reading, they seem to mostly be 'shared use' pedestrian/cycling paths, and I think that might be contributing to the cycling on the pavement thing, as it creates ambiguity about the rights/wrongs of it.

 

[bobbyp]

Of course shared paths add to the problems, it can actually be difficult to work out why you're supposed to cycle on a bit of narrow pavement but you're not allowed to cycle on a wide pavement.

Reading does have a problem with cycle access. I live on the west side of town and to get out from the station to my house you either have to go round the town way system (an extra 1/2 mile), cut through the ped precinct or brave a dual carriageway with underpasses and on/off ramps.

 

[Keith Oates]

If they 'get in' and carryout their promise then it will be good for the town, and if it's successful it may also make other towns follow a similar line!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[rich p]

At the risk of going over old ground, cycle lanes are fine if they're fine but given the state of upkeep of many, the impracticality on narrow roads etc they can easily become a menace to cyclists.
We need a change in car user attitude more than we need cycle lanes which often merely reinforce drivers' beliefs that we shouldn't be on the road in the first place.

 

[snorri]

Agreed with rich_p, cyclists should be on the road, but there is a case for contra flow cycle lanes and shortcuts which save cyclists from lengthy one way systems around towns.

 

[John the Monkey]

We need a change in car user attitude more than we need cycle lanes which often merely reinforce drivers' beliefs that we shouldn't be on the road in the first place.

Yup - cyclists should be able to mix with other traffic easily at city speeds (i.e. 30 limit). There's probably more of a case for (good) provision where speeds exceed that though. I hope people who actually cycle (regularly, not just a Sunday pootle) get a say in what gets put in (assuming the programme goes ahead) and get listened to.

 

[another_dave_b]

Yup - cyclists should be able to mix with other traffic easily at city speeds (i.e. 30 limit). There's probably more of a case for (good) provision where speeds exceed that though. I hope people who actually cycle (regularly, not just a Sunday pootle) get a say in what gets put in (assuming the programme goes ahead) and get listened to.

I think perhaps the most important element of the Conservatives proposals is that they are advocating a 'network'.

Rush hour in Reading is not far off gridlock. Increasing cycling could be a big help in reducing traffic volume, especially I'd say, with 'the school run'.

Reading is pretty flat, a university town, and has two Sustrans routes running throught it. Developing cycling's potential to improve Reading's traffic situation strikes me as a good idea, that can be implemented pretty quickly.

The London Cycling Campaign used to sell an AZ type map marked with their suggested cycle network of low traffic routes. As I recall it was essentially a (inner) ring road (like the north/south circular), crossed with a four north/four south routes running from the centre to the outskirts.

A marked network of 'low traffic' routes would, in my opinion, be a big help in encouraging non-cyclists, and in some cases their parents, that cycling is a perfectly safe option.

 

[jonesy]

At the risk of going over old ground, cycle lanes are fine if they're fine but given the state of upkeep of many, the impracticality on narrow roads etc they can easily become a menace to cyclists.
We need a change in car user attitude more than we need cycle lanes which often merely reinforce drivers' beliefs that we shouldn't be on the road in the first place.

Sadly it is necessary to keep going over this old ground as long as it takes to get local authorities to start using guidance on cycle friendly infrastructure.

Cycling England's Design Checklist is well worth printing out and showign to councillors, highways officers etc..
http://www.cyclingengland.co.uk/engineering2e.php