Promotion of Major Transport Schemes

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
tombaileytyne
Promotion of Major Transport Schemes

I thought I’d post this link up as an example of what it takes to get a major transport scheme funded. This project for a new road bridge in Sunderland has made the shortlist of schemes that the DfT will fund.

http://www.newsunderlandbridge.com/

The thing that strikes me about this is thye level of sophistication and marketing behind the project. Can you imagine any UK local authority ever attempting anything similar for a cycling scheme?

by my reckoning we all have 2 years to get something similar sorted out for our own pet infrastructure schemes that we want to see happen. At some point towards the end of this parliament the purse strings are going to open and every highway authority in the country will be blowing the dust off its bypass projects shelved since the 1970’s, handing them to a web designer and applying the greenwash.

sallyhinch

And to an extent, it’s already happening:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/oct/06/road-bui...?

One of the ways the Dutch manage traffic in their towns is by combining a ring road or bypass with simultaneous measures to make the town being bypassed less penetrable to through traffic. That way, new roads don’t simply generate new traffic but genuinely achieve what they set out to do.

We’re starting to gather material from the field trip and putting it into a typical UK context. Out of that we could come up with an ‘Assenize’ plan that could sit alongside a new bypass proposal we could genuinely improve life for the inhabitants of a town, rather than just tearing up the countryside for no benefit.. We’d have to make it pretty slick though.

AKA TownMouse

christhebull

The idea of “downgrading” bypassed routes is not alien to the UK of course, it is just that it is usually a missed opportunity in terms of cycling as far as the physical space to change things and the quality of any infrastructure is concerned. Have a look at this junction in Milford on the former A3, where a no through road has its own filter arrow because this used to be a B road, but it was cut off when the new A3 was built. There is plenty of room for cycle tracks, pedestrian signals, etc; but the layout is still the same as it was when it was a major trunk road.

Where routes have been bypassed, there is often plenty of space for infrastructure. A common scenario is that a road with 2 lanes in each direction is reduced to a single lane. This would leave plenty of room for cycle infrastructure but unfortunately it seems highway authorities think hatching and buildouts look nicer.

There are plenty of other examples of roads which have been bypassed or blocked off with zero consideration for cyclists. Sometimes the bypass itself will cause a road to be blocked or diverted, reducing traffic along it but also typically ruining it as a useful cycling route.

tombaileytyne

You’ve both touched on a key decision that some local campaign groups should probably be taking. Do you try and promote a cycling infrastructure cheme on it’s own or hitch on to one of several wider highways schemes (which you may oppose). The example I have up here is schemes being promoted on the A1058 / A19 which on their own damage the viability of nearby cycle routes. The pragmatic thing to do may be to push for major cycleway upgrades to be integrated into these schemes in a “ can’t beat them join them “ manner. Whichever way we try to do it I suspect the initial presentation will be down to us to sell the idea.

Perhaps where GB Embassy comes in is building a library / templates to help state the economic case and illustrate what we want to see?

sallyhinch
– our (my, anyway) hearts want to oppose all big road projects, while our heads may see the opportunity that’s there to use them for the greater good. I think your pragmatic approach is right.

As to your idea, we’re working at the moment on a set of documents encapsulating what we’ve learned from the study tour and trying to place them in a UK context so this may at least do the second part of what you suggest. For the economic case, maybe worth expanding on that in the wiki?

AKA TownMouse

christhebull

I understand that you may be opposed to big road projects even if they could involve quality cycle infrastructure built on former alignments (sometimes former roads are abandoned entirely such as this dual carriageway); but that made me think about other big transport projects, namely that of rail. The ongoing or proposed redevelopments of Blackfriars and London Bridge stations have been an epic fail for cycling to put it bluntly, with TOCs happy to cut cycle routes in half and TfL increasing pedestrian safety by increasing speed limits (apparently). However, I think that there are some conceivable circumstances where rail schemes could benefit cycling. The only, mildly convoluted example I can think of, is that a new rail bridge over a major road or river could have a cycle bridge as part of the structure. Oh wait, these do exist…

tombaileytyne

or the service road for the cambridge guided busway which is also a cycle route.

tombaileytyne

Decided to have a go at using something like this to support an attempt to get some cash out of the LSTF for some improvements I want to see locally. I submitted a written proposal with facts and figures but also set up this site with a few nice photos to try and give it some credibility: https://tynecoastproject.wordpress.com/

After all, if its on the internet it must be true….

sallyhinch

Why should the devil have all the best marketing, after all…

AKA TownMouse

Log in or register to post comments