The golden age of cycling?

[ericmark]

It seems speed limits are to be lowered to 20 MPH but chicken and the egg comes to mind, Armco barriers and winding roads with no view ahead do not create a safe place for cycling.

Before the speed limits are lowered it needs all Armco barriers on shared roads to be removed, bad enough being hit by a car, trapped between car and Armco barrier is a death sentence. And we need safe cycle routes between all towns and villages, or at least ability to carry bikes on trains and buses.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

It seems speed limits are to be lowered to 20 MPH but chicken and the egg comes to mind, Armco barriers and winding roads with no view ahead do not create a safe place for cycling.

Before the speed limits are lowered it needs all Armco barriers on shared roads to be removed, bad enough being hit by a car, trapped between car and Armco barrier is a death sentence. And we need safe cycle routes between all towns and villages, or at least ability to carry bikes on trains and buses.

Are you advocating all roads that currently have safety barriers in place (for vehicle safety) are reduced to 20mph limits, thus meaning the safety barriers can be removed because vehicles aren't going fast enough to require the barriers? What happens on e.g. a country road that has a significant drop to one side? With no barriers, if a vehicle goes off for whatever reason, there's nothing to stop it going down the drop?

 

[ericmark]

Basic yes, two options, space behind the barrier for walkers and bikes, or remove barrier.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

What are the statistics for cyclist/pedestrians being crushed between cars and barriers?

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Basic yes, two options, space behind the barrier for walkers and bikes, or remove barrier.

I'm not sure if you're being serious or not?

Building a bike lane behind the barrier will be a non starter in many cases, either due to the layout of the land, land ownership, cost or a combo of all three. Removing the barriers isn't viable as they are there for vehicle safety. Even if vehicles were trundling along at 20mph, it doesn't mean they can't veer off-road for whatever reason. Hence the need for the barriers.

I use a 6-7 mile stretch of A road when I commute. Granted it doesn't have barriers. Currently a 60mph limit. Would you have it reduced to 20mph for the safety of cyclists? Bear in mind 100s of vehicles use it daily whereas the no. of cyclists will be much (much) lower.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I think we all just have to learn to live along, if we were starting the road network from scratch it would be very diferent but that's (obviously) never gonna happen and there just isn't and never will be the money to ge a good cycling network.

 

[Lucid]

It seems speed limits are to be lowered to 20 MPH but chicken and the egg comes to mind, Armco barriers and winding roads with no view ahead do not create a safe place for cycling.

Before the speed limits are lowered it needs all Armco barriers on shared roads to be removed, bad enough being hit by a car, trapped between car and Armco barrier is a death sentence. And we need safe cycle routes between all towns and villages, or at least ability to carry bikes on trains and buses.

Welsh speed limits are only to be lowered in built-up areas (i.e. not country roads) and only for those roads where the current posted limit is 30mph.

I'm sure there will be some exceptions, but on the whole do 30mph roads in cities, towns and villages routinely require Armco barriers?

The Welsh government has set itself some targets for reducing the numbers of killed and seriously injured on its roads. Headline writers seize on the plan in an attempt to scare-up a reaction. However, looking at the Police stats which run up to 2018, the background here is that the figures show a steady and significant decline from the start of the measuring period in 1993, and that's despite a significant increase in the amount of traffic on Welsh roads in the same period. The background then is alot more traffic and yet safer roads as far as KSIs are concerned.

One could interpret those figures as drivers being safer, or it could be that improving safety standards in cars as leading to better survival rates and fewer serious injuries. The data doesn't go in to the detail here.

Speaking of holes in the data, the article mentions that over 50% of KSIs occur on 30mph roads. I wonder though,what's the percentage mix by mile of 30mph roads versus all other types, and which speed limit of road is more likely to have road features such as junctions, traffic lights and other road features that put all road users at increased risk? I suspect some can see what I am getting at.

 

[RandomGrinch]

Another Welsh resident!
I would definitely disagree with the removal of safety barriers! - in the built-up area in which I live, the vast majority of barriers are there to protect pedestrians from vehicles, rather than protecting the vehicles themselves.

My thoughts on the 20 mph limit:

When it is rolled out, I would love to see an emphasis on zero-tollerance for tailgating/road rage etc; I have been pushed so many times (occasionally with animosity), when simply sticking to the speed limit (even more so in a local 20mph trial area). Why do people get upset with me, surely if there was a reason to be angry, shouldn't they be angry with the government?

To stick to 20, I am using the same rpm in 3rd gear (albeit using less power). I just wonder if there will be an increase in pollution due to vehicle being in an area for a longer duration? Or will the lower limit allow traffic to flow better?
It would be interesting to find out the government's modelling.
All probably irrelevant in the near future, when the majority of vehicles become electric!

And near me, the South Wales valleys; leading out from Cardiff, there are routes of up to 25 miles that are almost continuously built-up areas. Most with 30 limits with small stretches of 40.
The journeys can currently be abysmal, if the majority of the roads were set to 20, a journey by car may become untenable! But is that part of the reason?

In general, I think the 20 limit is a good idea, but I hope some sensible thought is put into its Implementation

 

[Munroast]

To stick to 20, I am using the same rpm in 3rd gear (albeit using less power). I just wonder if there will be an increase in pollution due to vehicle being in an area for a longer duration? Or will the lower limit allow traffic to flow better?

My car gets more mpg at 20 than at 30 so there must be less pollution.

We have been in one of these blanket 20mph areas for nearly two years now. Sadly I don't think it has done anything at all for cycling safety or for making cycling more pleasant.

The only drivers staying anywhere near the 20 limit are the good careful and considerate drivers who where never any bother to cyclists when the speed limit was 30. And the morons who make cycling unpleasant are still driving well above 30 and still playing with their mobile phones. scottish police don't seem to care less, and as far as I can tell have given up enforcing any traffic laws.

So to sum up, the good careful drivers are being more careful and the idiots have not amended their ways in the slightest.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

And near me, the South Wales valleys; leading out from Cardiff, there are routes of up to 25 miles that are almost continuously built-up areas. Most with 30 limits with small stretches of 40. The journeys can currently be abysmal, if the majority of the roads were set to 20, a journey by car may become untenable! But is that part of the reason?

Depends what you believe. I don't think it takes much of a stretch of ones imagination to think the overall strategy is to get the masses out of their cars and onto public transport or bikes. One way to achieve that is to make driving ever more unbearable, through high fuel prices (think of the tax %), traffic cushions, 20 zones etc. There is real concern that, increasingly, private car ownership and driving from a to b will become the preserve of middle and upper classes.

 

[RandomGrinch]

My car gets more mpg at 20 than at 30 so there must be less pollution.

Yes, but is that enough of an offset to counteract being one and a half times as long in an area?
Negligible difference when travelling through a single village, but when the distance is several miles, will there be a difference?

 

[Munroast]

Yes, but is that enough of an offset to counteract being one and a half times as long in an area?
Negligible difference when travelling through a single village, but when the distance is several miles, will there be a difference?

less fuel is used over the same distance therefor less pollution. time doesn't really come into it. it is miles per gallon not hours per gallon

 

[RandomGrinch]

less fuel is used over the same distance therefor less pollution. time doesn't really come into it. it is miles per gallon not hours per gallon

Yes, got it! Thanks
Will have to do some investigation myself.

 

[ericmark]

built-up area in which I live, the vast majority of barriers are there to protect pedestrians from vehicles

No problem when that is the case, I don't think here where I live in Wales using a bike is ever going to take off, but if the government wants more cycles, then there needs to be safe routes.

Between Welshpool and Newtown there is no problem, there is a tow path between the two, same between Shotton and Chester, two safe routes, if cyclists don't want to use safe routes, that's their lookout as long as there is a safe route.

The speed limit as it stands is not a problem, where it is safe to do 60 MPH why not, and on a straight length of road no problem, or where the hedges are low enough to see ahead, however the A458 is a bending fast road, and in real terms the only way out of the village, and at the most dangerous bits, we have Armaco barriers, in many cases making worse not better, OK where there is a huge drop should people come off the road, but on bends where if the motorist got it wrong he would end up in a field why bother?

 

[mattylad]

I don't think it takes much of a stretch of ones imagination to think the overall strategy is to get the masses out of their cars and onto public transport

I'm sure it's the same in Wales as it is elsewhere.
Public transport? what public transport?

Taking the bus is either extremely expensive or there are never enough busses or even any busses, with private companies running the busses almost all routes that do not make a profit have been removed. There are generally not train tracks between where people live and the industrial estates etc. that they work in.
So using public transport is not possible for many, neither is cycling a viable option for many.

I'd love to cycle to work but it would need to be an e-bike to be able to get it up the hills to get back home and then I have nowhere to store a bike, while the bus runs past my front door I could not afford the costs of daily usage as it is more than running my car.

Until the government improves the public transport system then the car is still going to be the preferred method of travel for many.