CS6 Cycle Superhighway dropped

[Earl Aelfheah]

The CS6 Superhighway (Penge to City - via Camberwell and Elephant and Castle) has been dropped. Yet more proposed transport improvements for SE London dumped by Boris.

So not only does this part of London lack the tube, have an increasingly unreliable rail network, very few Thames bridges (after Boris dropped a proposal), no tram (after Boris dropped a proposal) and no Boris bikes (They're being extended West). It now misses out on a cycle highway too. Maybe he could also withdraw the bus service in this part of town?

Excellent.

[Applespider]

Particularly frustrating since SE London had one of the higher rates of cycling in the last census results.

Oh well... at least there's only limited time under Boris left? Sorry - can't think of anything more positive! I assume that it's a done deal and there's noone to petition to change minds?

[PokerTime]

The tram was never really a goer rahrah. There was never any money in place for it, unlike crossrail for example.

The problem with many decisions on these kinds of projects, is the cost vs benefit to London economy. And that's as true for cycle lanes as anything else. Perhaps a better question would be why South transport infrastructure never seems to be as important as West, East and South West? It can't all be logistical.

[bemusED]

this is ridiculous!

the mayor has routinely underspent his cycling budget for the past 6 years.

https://www.london.gov.uk/media/assembly-member-press-releases/green-party/2014/01/news-from-darren-johnson-am-mayor-s-150m-cycling-underspend

he promotes hugely expensive iconic projects crossing the middle of london, only to be dug up for the thames sewer:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/exclusive-mayors-new-48m-cycle-superhighway-would-have-to-be-removed-after-just-one-year-to-make-way-for-supersewer-construction-9739803.html

yet its the routes leading in and out of town from areas like ours where nominal sums of money would make all the difference.

James - what influence do Southwark have on this Cycle Superhighway 6 being dropped?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Boris certainly does like to spend transport budget on vanity projects - routemaster - Thames dangleway anyone?

[stephent]

Cycle Siperhighways have turned out to be exceptionally difficult to deliver because they share tfl roads and council controlled roads, and getting everyone lined up has turned out to be painful (particularly when you want to segregate off a large chunk).

The mayor now seems to favour his 'crossrail for cycle' routes, or the new quietways.

[James Barber]

My undertstanding is that they're planning to deliver fewer superhighways but to a much higher standard.

So instead of lots of blue tarmace actual segregated cycle paths. Now I'd dispute the detailed design which I believe is flawed but the thinking of making new facilities to a much higher standard is for me a good thing.

[cle]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My undertstanding is that they're planning to

> deliver fewer superhighways but to a much higher

> standard.

> So instead of lots of blue tarmace actual

> segregated cycle paths. Now I'd dispute the

> detailed design which I believe is flawed but the

> thinking of making new facilities to a much higher

> standard is for me a good thing.

I agree with this. Proper grade separated cycleways are better than the current bits of paint we have. As long as one comes this way, that is...

[jjjjj]

I think this should be taken as an opportunity to create a fully segregated route. Obviously the demand has already been highlighted due to the creation of the CS6 route in the first place, so it makes sense to continue to create a better solution.

James, please use your power as a councillor to get this across to Boris.

Thanks.

[nunhead_man]

Simple painted cycle lanes are as much use as a chocolate teapot without enforcement, as is the case for advanced stop lines. So segregation is vital on roads with 30mph + speeding (not speedlimits!!).

But if 20 mph is enforced, perhaps segregation would not be needed?

Also my worry about segregated routes is that cycling trips are increasing fast and facilities built now MUST have 20 years forward growth planned in - unless the separation is made of temporary measures ? c/f the congestion on Tavistock Place

[DulwichFox]

More Cycle lanes mean more congestion for other road users.

Congestion + 20 MPH limit means vehicles travelling closer together = more pollution.

No easy solution.

DulwichFox

[James Barber]

Hi DF,

Sort of yes but most likely no.

IF segregated cycle paths lead to many more people cycling rather than driving then congestion would be reduced for people driving. Taking space for blue tarmac but not creating such good cycling conditions would increase congestion.

You may not have seen the volume of people currently cycling into/out of town. Multiplying those numbers by several factors would reduce air pollution, improve health, and keep more money in our economy.

[pipsky2008]

'

[hoipolloi]

There is currently a public consultation open on the proposed new Cycle Superhighways - anyone can respond and make their views known. See the TfL website for further information.