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.
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.
