This is the outline for a proposal for a new kind of elevated cycle way. The sky cycle way is an elevated cycle network which reduces commute time for travel for cyclists. This network turns any city into a flat Amsterdam or Cambridge. We believe this is the lowest cost for installation for any personal rapid transit system.
Driver labor, and related time-based costs, are the dominant element – often 70% or more -- of transit operating budgets in the developed world.
This partly explains why cycle monorails and elevated cycle ways are so much cheaper than traditional monorail ( aka train on a stick ). Also check out http://www.humantransit.org/2011/04/basics-walking-distance-to-transit.html on why elevated cycle lanes help improve the radius for the network.
I have generally been very interested in the wire monorail systems. They seem to offer the most in terms of minimal visual intrusion for maximum road carrying capacity. If you look at some of the other YouTube videos we highlight you can see that you can even turn corners.
Naturally the kinds of utility cycling experiences we would like to see would need an enclosure to protect from the wind and rain. But the position and the fact that the vehicle runs at height are very good examples of how viable such a system could be.
Still it is interesting to see how quiet and unobtrusive the wire cycle monorail systems can be.
A nice peice work from Lancaster which looked at the reasons people don't cycle. Partly obscured by the introduction of walking as part of the suty.
"Indeed
poor safety was one of the key reasons for not cycling expressed by approximately 80% of
respondents"
Igyou look most people would agree (low scores on page 6) with it would benfit my health, sace me money and not contribute to local air pollution, they also tend to disagree it would be too much offored but do agree the it would expose me to wind and weather.
London Mayor Boris Johnson has announced that he is looking at plans to construct a network of elevated cycle paths alongside the capital’s network of railway lines. “There is a proposal, which is very interesting, to hook up mainline stations in London along the side of the raised railway tracks, with a new cycle path,” Johnson told The Times. Nice to see the transportation press getting wind of elevated cycle networks.
you may have seen some of John's videos on YouTube where he presents the reasons for city cycling.
This is a book covering the same material - there is even a Kindle version.
"Bicycling in cities is booming, for many reasons: health and environmental benefits, time and cost savings, more and better bike lanes and paths, innovative bike sharing programs, and the sheer fun of riding. City Cycling offers a guide to this urban cycling renaissance, with the goal of promoting cycling as sustainable urban transportation available to everyone. It reports on cycling trends and policies in cities in North America, Europe, and Australia, and offers information on such topics as cycling safety, cycling infrastructure provisions including bikeways and bike parking, the wide range of bike designs and bike equipment, integration of cycling with public transportation, and promoting cycling for women and children. City Cycling emphasizes that bicycling should not be limited to those who are highly trained, extremely fit, and daring enough to battle traffic on busy roads. The chapters describe ways to make city cycling feasible, convenient, and safe for commutes to work and school, shopping trips, visits, and other daily transportation needs. The book also offers detailed examinations and illustrations of cycling conditions in different urban environments: small cities (including Davis, California, and Delft, the Netherlands), large cities (including Sydney, Chicago, Toronto and Berlin), and "megacities" (London, New York, Paris, and Tokyo). These chapters offer a closer look at how cities both with and without historical cycling cultures have developed cycling programs over time. The book makes clear that successful promotion of city cycling depends on coordinating infrastructure, programs, and government policies."
Norman Foster unveils plans for elevated 'SkyCycle' bike routes in London | Art and design | theguardian.com: The project, which has the backing of Network Rail and Transport for London, would see over 220km of car-free routes installed above London's suburban rail network, suspended on pylons above the tracks and accessed at over 200 entrance points. At up to 15 metres wide, each of the ten routes would accommodate 12,000 cyclists per hour and improve journey times by up to 29 minutes, according to the designers.
Promoting Walking and Cycling: New Perspectives on Sustainable Travel
With Christmas coming you might want to get your self this very excellent book an in-depth study of at the reasons why people don't cycle.
Promoting Walking and Cycling: New Perspectives on Sustainable Trave
"Promoting walking and cycling proposes solutions to one of the most pressing problems in contemporary British transport planning. The need to develop more sustainable urban mobility lies at the heart of energy and environmental policies and has major implications for the planning of cities and for the structure of economy and society. However, most people feel either unable or unwilling to incorporate travel on foot or by bike into their everyday journeys. This book uses innovative quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine in depth, and in an international and historical context, why so many people fail to travel in ways that are deemed by most to be desirable. It proposes evidence-based policy solutions that could increase levels of walking and cycling substantially. This book is essential reading for planners and policy makers developing and implementing transport policies at both national and local levels, plus researchers and students in the field of mobility, transport, sustainability and urban planning."
Clearly one of the big problems we have is that most cycling is seen as a recreational activity. Clearly to have the big advantages and benefits we need to free ourselves of this view. The one thing we know about recreational activity is it is the use of disposable time. That means that if something intrudes into your normal schedule then you can lose the "habit". If we want the big health changes cycling offers then we need to have something that people do every day, and commuting is one of those activities we generally all do. Secondly the only way to have significant environmental benefits in terms of global warming, health risks from general pollution and traffic congestion, then it is in the realms of going from somewhere to somewhere that cycling as its biggest contribution has yet make.
"BBC News - Viewpoint: 'Why I won't let my eight-year-old cycle on the road': That's because even though I know that she is statistically more likely to have an accident in our bathroom at home rather than on the road, cycling just doesn't feel safe. It's a purely emotional response rather than a logical one - and that's what most parents base their decisions on.
And it's not just me. Parents across the country think the same, which is why just 1% of kids ride to school. Earlier this year, Lord Coe said that today's children could be the first to have a shorter life expectancy than their parents due to a lack of physical activity. This is not only bad for individuals, it is bad for the economy, costing the country £20bn a year."
"The case for cycling is supported by economists, the NHS and business specialists, yet despite the fact we are drowning in supporting evidence, we are still waiting for a major political party to make a concrete, long-term commitment to cycling, to pledge at least £10 per person to change the way we travel."
Transport policies to increase active and sustainable travel in Britain have focused mainly on persuading people of the health benefits of walking and cycling for short trips, and have assumed that if people can be persuaded that more active travel has personal benefits then behavioural change will follow. Research reported in this paper, based mainly on detailed qualitative research in four English towns, argues that the complexities and contingencies that most people encounter in everyday life often make such behavioural change difficult. Attention is focused on three sets of factors: perceptions of risk; constraints created by family and household responsibilities; and perceptions of normality. It is suggested that unless such factors are tackled directly then policies to increase levels of walking and cycling will have limited success. In particular, it is argued that there needs to be a much more integrated approach to transport policy that combines interventions to make walking and (especially) cycling as risk-free as possible with restrictions on car use and attitudinal shifts in the ways in which motorists view other road users. Such policies also need to be linked to wider social and economic change which, in combination, creates an environment in which walking or cycling for short trips in urban areas is perceived as the logical and normal means of travel and using the car is viewed as exceptional.
Highlights
► Most British people find it hard to incorporate active travel into everyday routines. ► Perceptions of risk are a major deterrent especially for cycling. ► Family and household constraints frequently prevent walking and cycling. ► Walking and cycling is not seen as a normal way to travel. ► Transport policies need to recognise these constraints more explicitly.
'The Government's vision is that walking and cycling become the natural
choices for shorter journeys - or as part of a longer journey- regardless of
age, gender, fitness level or income we have set out our ambition for cycling and walking up until 2025:'
This is the part I like
'To double cycling, where cycling activity is measured as the
estimated total number of bicycle stages made each year, from 0.8
billion stages in 2013 to 1.6 billion stages4;'
While most of this money is going to be spent on small improvements in at-grade road facilities and much more money for cycling cheerleaders it's still good to see the ambition.
Looks like some fairly good speakers - if you can afford the ticket.
Designing-in Walking & Cycling: London, Kia Oval, 6 Nov 2014 | 2nd Annual Conference
Designing-in Walking & Cycling: How walking and cycling can support transport needs and improve health, economy and well-being
Characteristics of the built environment either support or discourage walking and cycling.
We’re learning how to engineer effective infrastructure for cycling and better conditions for walking. However, too often we apply design and engineering techniques like sticking plasters.
This event will look at how we can deliver integrated solutions that make whole places better.
Speakers include:
Stephen Joseph, Campaign for Better Transport
Philippa Oldham, Head of Transport and Manufcaturing Division, Institute of Mechanical Engineers
Niels Hoe, HOE360 Consulting, Denmark (invited)
Brian Deegan, Principal Technical Planner, Transport for London
Rachel Aldred, University of Westminster
Esther Kurland, Urban Design London
Max Martinez, Space Syntax
Alan Bain, JMP
Richard Smith, Action Streets
Anna Goodman, iConnect Consortium
Dr Adrian Davies, Public Health and Transport Consultant
John Dales, Director, Urban Movement
Delegate rates
First Public Sector delegate £199
First Private Sector delegate £299
Additional delegates £149
Plans for a new £600m “floating” cycle route along the edge of the River Thames in London have been announced. It is expected to stretch for around seven miles from Battersea, west of the city centre, to Canary Wharf, the financial district to the east. The idea has been put forward by the River Cycleway consortium, a group of architects, engineers and artists.
The construction is expected to rise and fall with the river tides and to have a number of access points along the route. The “motion” of the cycleway will be used to generate energy to power lighting. It is expected that at least some of the funding will come from private finance – a charge, expected to be £1.50 per trip, will be used to cover ongoing maintenance costs of the infrastructure.
In a large, congested city, the Thames stands out as an under-used transport corridor and local authorities want to encourage cycling. Such an expensive and high-profile scheme would help give the idea that cycling is being treated seriously as a mode of travel. So, on the face of it, this sounds like a great idea.
The proposal, however, raises a number of issues and worries, which the plans as published do not seem to adequately address. There does not appear to have been any serious attempt to study demand – who would use it and what sorts of numbers might be expected on a daily basis? In practice it seems the main focus may be on leisure: tourists and Sunday trippers who wish to see the sights of London from an unusual perspective. Will it really appeal to the daily commuter cyclist, especially given the costs of use?
There is a major question mark over the cost; £600m seems very expensive for just seven miles of cycleway. Road-based cycleways typically cost significantly less than this and arguably give far greater value for money.
London mayor Boris Johnson rides one of his eponymous bikes. Jonathan Brady/PA Archive
London is already a growing cycling success story. The capital has more cyclists than ever and has received considerable investment in cycling infrastructure, a public bicycle scheme (the so-called “Boris Bikes”) and support for cycling goes right to the top of City Hall. Focusing investment once again on the capital isn’t really the best and most equitable use of such a considerable sum of money. Compare the £600m with the £77.2m invested by the government in eight cities outside of London (with a further local contribution of £45.4m) through the Cycle City Ambition grants.
The £600m might be better spent elsewhere in the country, or even perhaps in London’s suburbs, areas where fewer people cycle and where dedicated cycle infrastructure is poor or non-existent. In the UK, aside from a handful of urban areas which perform as well or better than London, much of the country has lower levels of cycling and could benefit from investment.
In any case, is this the kind of infrastructure cyclists really want? Recent research has clearly shown that cyclists do not fit neatly into a single category and that their views and ideas for what works best for them cover a wide spectrum. A single, expensive and very geographically focused piece of infrastructure is unlikely to appeal to large numbers and, more importantly, is unlikely to be of practical use to many cyclists.
Perhaps the proposers should start to talk with cyclists and those who currently do not cycle (but might be persuaded to do so) to gain a better understanding of what they want. The answer is likely to be rather more mundane: better cycle paths, lighting, signposting and possibly further controls on aggressive driving.
This isn’t to argue against thinking big – major investments of this type could have a huge and positive impact for many people. But they would have to be focused on something that helps many people, not just the lucky few who fancy a scenic trip to Westminster.
Miles Tight receives funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.
This is quite a fun proposal by some London architects to recycle some unused space in London (the river) as a cycling lane. I often wished I could cycle under Islington along the canal tunnel, the only section which doesn't have a lane, then carry on to Old Street. Canals in London are popular cycle tracks for a reason ( long, no cars, flat, no juntions ).
While there are a number of ways I could see this being done cheaper and still be a signficant attraction, I think what I most admire is that London architects are thinking actively about cyclists.
SkyCycle | Space Syntax: A revolutionary cycling infrastructure to transform London’s transport network
The Mayor’s aim is for London to be the best major city in the world. However, the capital’s transport network is at capacity and faces the challenge of population growth of 12 percent over the next decade. The government has committed to investment in transport, through airport planning, high-speed rail, Thameslink and Crossrail. The Mayor’s transport strategy also seeks to address the needs of pedestrians and cyclists in the city’s crowded streets and in areas where the public realm is poor. The environmental and health benefits of cycling notwithstanding, the bicycle is a more efficient use of London’s limited space – we believe there is a pressing need for network modelling of new capacity for these active, self-determined modes of transport.
Exterior Architecture, Foster Partners and Space Syntax have jointly developed SkyCycle, a new approach to transform cycling in the capital. Following existing suburban railway corridors, a wide, secure deck would be constructed above the trains to create new cycle routes throughout London.
The proposed SkyCycle network follows existing suburban rail services and provides over 220 kilometres of safe, car free cycle routes, which can be accessed at over 200 entrance points. Almost six million people live within the catchment area of the proposed network, half of whom live and work within 10 minutes of an entrance. Each route can accommodate 12,000 cyclists per hour and will improve journey times by up to 29 minutes.
The SkyCycle approach is revolutionary, and has potential applications in cities around the world. Applying lateral thinking, Britain’s engineering expertise and investment in transport technology could lead to the creation of an efficient platform building system.
As London’s railway lines were originally built for steam trains, they follow contours that naturally reduce the amount of energy expended and avoid steep gradients. SkyCycle exploits this historic legacy. Associated benefits include the regeneration of the typically low value, often underutilised industrial sites next to railway lines; vertically layering the city to create new social spaces and amenities on these cycling high streets; and the integration of automated goods delivery networks.
Early studies of a SkyCycle system indicate that it provides capacity at a much lower cost than building new roads and tunnels. The possibility of the deck providing development opportunities for businesses along the route, particularly where it intersects with stations and bridges, has also been the subject of the study, exploring ideas for public/private commercial growth and regeneration. The SkyCycle study team will continue to further develop these scenarios, and the project has already been presented to the GLA, TfL and Network Rail, as well as to developers and contractors with specialist rail experience.
MEASURING THE CHANGES IN AGGREGATE CYCLING PATTERNS
BETWEEN 2003 AND 2012 FROM A SPACE SYNTAX PERSPECTIVE Stephen Law
One of the principal arguments for elevated cycle routes is that cyclists don't like taking back streets. Elevated cycle lanes are the only way to install, quiet safe cycle space on busy streets that cyclists want to use.
This paper provides persuasive data that suggests that the introduction of blue routes (safe cycling) increases cycle usage but people will still prefer to travel on a busy High Street over a quiet segregated route.
Basically it says that given the choice between a safe route and a simple quick route cyclists will prefer the simple quick route even if it doesn't have a cycle lane marking. Cyclists will use quieter routes if they have special markings ( safe cycle lanes to help to boost cycling).
This paper also suggests that amenities on route aren't that important ( at least on this test area).
As a background observation it's fantastic to see a 1000% increase in cycling from 2003 to 2012!
Sounds like a good justification for cycle monorail like system.. ( read on).
Perspectives and images of cycling as a barrier or facilitator of cycling: The public images of cycling can act as barriers or facilitators of cycling. This qualitative study explored images and perceptions of cycling, their potential influence on cycling and whether these views differed between regular, occasional and non-riders.
Seventy participants (24 males and 46 females) were recruited. Of these, 22 were classified as non-riders, 23 were occasional riders and 25 were regular riders. Twelve focus groups were held in inner Sydney during October and November 2005. Data were audio taped, transcribed and thematically analysed.
Themes linked to images of cycling included: ‘clean and green’; ‘healthy and fun’; ‘dangerous’ and ‘serious business’. Themes linked to images of cyclists included: ‘risk takers and law breakers’ and ‘status and sub-cultures’. Discussion centred on the low social status of riding over other transport modes, the relative acceptability of different riding sub-cultures, the ‘green’ image of cycling transport and the status associated with the riders clothing and bicycle choice, especially lycra and its ‘serious and sporty’ connotation.
While ‘cycling’ was generally viewed as a positive, environmentally friendly activity, the actions of some ‘cyclists’ were disliked, which influenced views about cycling, particularly among non-riders. A cycling acceptability hierarchy emerged; with recreational riding at the top, followed by cycling for sport and exercise, with transport/commuter cycling towards the bottom. Bicycle couriers were viewed least favourably. A common perception among non-riders was the latter two groups were rule breakers and risk takers, while regular riders felt unfairly judged by this stereotype.
While there was greater acceptance of recreational riding, riding for transport was not viewed as a mainstream activity.There is a need to improve the public acceptability of cycling and change public norms so it is seen as an everyday activity that can be undertaken by almost anyone, without the need for special clothing, expensive equipment or limited to purpose built facilities.
Research Highlights
While ‘cycling’ was generally viewed as a positive, environmentally friendly activity, the actions of some ‘cyclists’ were disliked, which influenced views about cycling, particularly among non-riders. A cycling acceptability hierarchy emerged; with recreational riding at the top, followed by cycling for sport and exercise, with transport/commuter cycling towards the bottom. Bicycle couriers were viewed least favourably. A common perception among non-riders was the latter two groups were rule breakers and risk takers, while regular riders felt unfairly judged by this stereotype. ► While there was greater acceptance of recreational riding, riding for transport was not viewed as a mainstream activity. There is a need to improve the public acceptability of cycling and change public norms so it is seen as an everyday activity that can be undertaken by almost anyone, without the need for special clothing, expensive equipment or limited to purpose built facilities.
P. Oja1, S. Titze2, A. Bauman3, B. de Geus4, P. Krenn2, B. Reger-Nash5, T. Kohlberger2
The purpose of this study was to update the evidence on the
health benefits of cycling. A systematic review of the
literature resulted in 16 cycling-specific studies. Cross-
sectional and longitudinal studies showed a clear positive
relationship between cycling and cardiorespiratory fitness in
youths. Prospective observational studies demonstrated a
strong inverse relationship between commuter cycling and
all-cause mortality, cancer mortality, and cancer morbidity
among middle-aged to elderly subjects. Intervention studies
among working-age adults indicated consistent improve-
ments in cardiovascular fitness and some improvements in
cardiovascular risk factors due to commuting cycling. Six
studies showed a consistent positive dose–response gradient between the amount of cycling and the health benefits.
Systematic assessment of the quality of the studies showed
most of them to be of moderate to high quality. According to
standard criteria used primarily for the assessment of
clinical studies, the strength of this evidence was strong
for fitness benefits, moderate for benefits in cardiovascular
risk factors, and inconclusive for all-cause mortality, cor- onary heart disease morbidity and mortality, cancer risk,
and overweight and obesity. While more intervention re-
search is needed to build a solid knowledge base of the health
benefits of cycling, the existing evidence reinforces the
current efforts to promote cycling as an important contri- butor for better population health.
What I find interesting about these Scientific papers is that they frequently balance the advantages of cycling against increased intake of car pollution. Naturally and elevated cycle would not have these problems, but it is interesting that the problems are worse if you are actually a car driver/ passenger.
From a government report calculating the pollution impact of 'fine particles' ( the kind emitted from diesel engines ).
"It is estimated that fine particles have an impact on mortality equivalent to 4,267 deaths
in London in 2008, within a range of 756 to 7,965. A permanent reduction in PM2.5 concentrations of 1μg/m3 would gain 400,000 years of life for the current population
(2008) in London and a further 200,000 years for those born during that period,
followed for the lifetime of the current population. For the current population, this is
equivalent to an average 3 weeks per member of the 2008 population, with the
expected gains differing by age." (Dr Brian G Miller)
A switch to elevated cycle lanes would do a huge amount about this and a number of other problems. Something which an uptake of google driverless car's wouldn't help with.
Possibly Dr Millier is just a lone loon perhaps ? - no this evidence is used by this
The net predicted result of all this is an increase in CO2 as people switch from Nitrogen Dioxide diesel.
So what would these 4267 lives be worth to you? How much would you spend ?
The actual answer is anything over a quid is pushing it. According to cycling Weekly we spend about about £1 per year head of population. What would happen if we got the price of an expensive coffee from everyone to improve cycle lanes ( elevated or other wise)?
Cycling and the city: A case study of how gendered, ethnic and class identities can shape healthy transport choices: However, it relies on the cultivation of a particular ‘assertive’ style to defend against the risks of road danger and aggression. While the identities of some professional (largely White) men and women could be bolstered by cycling, the aesthetic and symbolic goals of cycling were less appealing to those with other class, gendered and ethnic identities.
wow this is a veritable feast of information. This contains vector data showing the rides of many hundreds of cyclists in Atlanta. It's a fantastic insight into cycling in a very hot city.
This qualitative research, recently published in the Journal of Transportation Research A, suggests people are not as interested in saving time as they are in being comfortable, cocooned in privacy and able to keep up with the requirements of their flexible and busy lives.
But transport planners continue to prioritise rational motives over more emotional reasons for driving. Perhaps this is because it is easier to explain our aversion to other forms of transport as due to time.
The findings of this study suggest that commuters are unlikely to sacrifice the comfort of the private car for a minor time saving. To stand for 35 minutes on a crowded train or bus twice daily, or to ride a bike in the wind and rain, is, for some people at least, physically unpleasant."
If this argument is correct then some kind of suspended monorail (like Shweeb) would also be effective.
Strangely car's are responsible for lowering the density of the modern city, but they feel more crowded...
In this interesting article on why people drive in Syndey. I think the core argument for ECL from it. emerges.
"They used the car for many purposes. Many of these can be conceptualised as traditionally utilitarian: ferrying children and carting groceries, as well as micromanaging multiple time commitments to family, sport, study and secondary employment. Drivers found the car comfortable and cited the air-conditioning, aural concealment and protection from rain, wind, heat and darkness as the key motivators for using cars."
Unlike taking public transit (bus,tram,train) carrying quantities of groceries or children on your bike isn't a considerable problem ( if the ground is flat). I think what makes this article key is the knowlege that you are never going to get car drivers to switch to cycling without protection from rain,wind,heat and darkness. This is why elevated cycle systems ( or principally covered ones ) are so necessary.
I think what gets my attention about this guide is that while it has a great deal of information about tactics it has very little about strategy. By strategy I mean tools to help predict which cycle routes would be popular.
I think the other part I object to is the width of the road. Personally, I think if you provide a 3 m wide cycle path then the temptation is to attract traffic on to it. You are certainly also less tempted to include the cycle track through some natural area if it is really that large. A cycle path only has to be about 30cm to 40 cm. This would encourage pedestrians to stay off it.
Naturally SUSTRANS have the job of supporting cyclists and pedestrians. I still think they need to get serious and think about cycling as more than a recreational activity.
Promoting transportation cycling for women: The role of bicycle infrastructure: Objective.
Females are substantially less likely than males to cycle for transport in countries with low bicycle transport mode share. We investigated whether female commuter cyclists were more likely to use bicycle routes that provide separation from motor vehicle traffic.
Methods.
Census of cyclists observed at 15 locations (including off-road bicycle paths, on-road lanes and roads with no bicycle facilities) within a 7.4�km radius of the central business district (CBD) of Melbourne, Australia, during peak commuting times in February 2004.
Results.
6589 cyclists were observed, comprising 5229 males (79.4%) and 1360 females (20.6%). After adjustment for distance of the bicycle facility from the CBD, females showed a preference for using off-road paths rather than roads with no bicycle facilities (odds ratio [OR]�=�1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12, 1.83), or roads with on-road bicycle lanes (OR�=�1.34, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.75).
Conclusions.
Consistent with gender differences in risk aversion, female commuter cyclists preferred to use routes with maximum separation from motorized traffic. Improved cycling infrastructure in the form of bicycle paths and lanes that provide a high degree of separation from motor traffic is likely to be important for increasing transportation cycling amongst under-represented population groups such as women.
Do the Health Benefits of Cycling Outweigh the Risks?: Although from a societal point of view a modal shift from car to bicycle may have beneficial health effects due to decreased air pollution emissions, decreased greenhouse gas emissions, and increased levels of physical activity, shifts in individual adverse health effects such as higher exposure to air pollution and risk of a traffic accident may prevail.
Objective
We describe whether the health benefits from the increased physical activity of a modal shift for urban commutes outweigh the health risks.
Data sources and extraction
We have summarized the literature for air pollution, traffic accidents, and physical activity using systematic reviews supplemented with recent key studies.
Data synthesis
We quantified the impact on all-cause mortality when 500,000 people would make a transition from car to bicycle for short trips on a daily basis in the Netherlands. We have expressed mortality impacts in life-years gained or lost, using life table calculations. For individuals who shift from car to bicycle, we estimated that beneficial effects of increased physical activity are substantially larger (3–14 months gained) than the potential mortality effect of increased inhaled air pollution doses (0.8–40 days lost) and the increase in traffic accidents (5–9 days lost). Societal benefits are even larger because of a modest reduction in air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and traffic accidents.
Conclusions
On average, the estimated health benefits of cycling were substantially larger than the risks relative to car driving for individuals shifting their mode of transport.
The Elevated cycle concept is centrally based on the notion that junctions are complex danger and momentum kill zones. So its very pleasing to see this small scale approach to re-thinking intersections.
To be honest, no elevated cycle scheme system is going to be 'complete' (100% coverage of all destinations) so it will always have to work in conjuntion with some shared-at-grade system. This looks like an excellent tactical way of doing that. I hope someone tries it out.
