Nudge

In a previous post I touched upon the cost of commuting across the river, the main issue being that the pricing of the various means of transport does not encourage people to leave their cars at home, time to look at this more closely...

A person driving through either of the tunnels in a normal car will pay the following fees

There is no discount for a return journey but a regular commuter can use a Fast Tag and receive a 20p reduction on each journey, this makes a return journey cost £2.60. The Fast Tag is a good choice because you pay on a per-use basis rather than a fixed monthly cost, so if you miss a day here or there you do not lose money.

These are the fees for using the train from Hamilton Sq to James St, this is one stop, a journey of about a mile.

You can see immediately that a single is £2.30 compared to £1.50 for a car, a return is £2.80 compared to £3.00 for a car.

It's the rail passes that are interesting though, for a 5 day commuter a weekly pass is £1.72 each way, more ven than just paying on the day. The monthly pass is £1.36 assuming 22 working days in a month. However, unlike the car commuters who only pay when they use the tunnel, a rail commuter pays a fixed fee for a month, so if you miss a couple of days the cost per journey can jump to £1.50

The ferry is a bit better

A weekly pass will set you back £1.10 per journey and the monthly pass £1.02, again provided you don't miss any days. But the ferry is slow and cold and if you miss it you could be waiting half an hour for the next one, having said that it is a lovely way to travel.

While researching this I noticed Merseytravel is to introduce a new smartcard, the Walrus, but it doesn't say if the pricing structures will be affected, in fact it looks like it will stay the same, certainly until the pay-as-you-go version is introduced in 18 months time.

So where does this leave us? Well as we've seen in many scenarios it is cheaper or no more expensive to travel by car than by train or ferry which is no incentive for Wirralians to commute by bicycle. The river is an unfortunate barrier to cycling, in most parts of the country a cycling commuter could travel their whole journey by bicycle, a cyclist commuter between the Wirral and Liverpool is forced to interrupt their journey with another mode of transport. Many cyclists will ride down to Hamilton Sq/Woodside so that they get the most exercise and spend the least amount of time possible on the train or ferry, but even this very short journey is more expensive than the tunnel.

It would be nice if Merseyrail/Merseytravel show some commitment to getting people out of cars by restructuring their pricing and they could start with this most obvious discrepancy, a reduction to £1 single, £1.50 return would not significantly reduce revenues but would provide an incentive for people to change and would be symbolic commitment to nudge people into changing their habits.

The Cyclist's Compromise

Whilst considering the previous post regarding the Strand I read an article on road.cc which inspired me to conduct a little experiment.

The Strand is the best, most direct route, from one side of the city to the other, but it is also treacherous and when it comes time to argue for a segregated cycle path alongside the Strand I'm sure we'll be told, what about this or that other route, because people planning cycle routes will send cyclists all over the place to prevent having to actually put in a safe cycle path.

So I set myself an experiment, the premise of which is - I am an office worker living near the Marina where there are lots of flats at the south end of the Strand, I work in an office in the commercial district, Old Hall St is the centre of the commercial district. If I want to commute to or from work each day, which route should I take? There were just two rules

1. Do not break the law.
2. Do not dismount.

So no riding on the pavement except shared use, no running red lights, and remain on the bike at all times, as cyclists should never be expected to dismount as we don't expect car drivers to get out and push.

Route 1 Sustrans
For time saving only this leg was done in reverse though it turned out the wind was following me in this direction and it felt much easier.

This is the Sustrans route, for the most part it follows NCR 56 along the riverside. It is almost all on shared use paths some sections are heavily cobbled, some are narrow. As I was riding on the shared use path I cycled considerately, I had to come almost to a stop at one point and ask three ladies to step aside so I could pass, they did so but one did remark (in a non-aggressive way) that 'We're on the pavement, you should be on the road'. I thought this was amusing as I never ride on pavements and on this rare occasion that I try riding on shared use I get told off. On the plus side, the route is almost completely traffic free.

2.88km in 11min 20s

Route 2 Through the city

I think in terms of danger this is even worse than the Strand, there are so many points of conflict, traffic lights, junctions, filter lanes, hills, it was just a nightmare and at 3.85km much longer, at commuting hours I could have cut off a bit of distance by going up Lord St and Church St, but these are off limits to bicycles during the day. No matter though it is still a route nobody would ever choose. (PS to the cab driver who raced past me and then slammed on to pull over and drop off a fare, you are a c***)


Route 3 The Strand

This is the most direct route, at 2.35km it is half a kilometre shorter than the Sustrans route, it was also three minutes faster despite the wind being against me and spending at least 1m sat at traffic lights. On the other hand I received punishment passes from two consecutive cab drivers. This is the route any utility cyclist would want to take, the shortest, flattest route, though many would be forced to choose a less convenient route out of fear for their life.

Cycling in the city will only take off when routes like the Strand are turned in to places people can happily, safely cycle. They should not be 8 lanes wide with no cycle path, they should not have luscious green central reservations while cyclists risk death and injury. The developers of the Strand have only one question to ask themselves "Would I let my children cycle along here?" If they can't answer it 'Yes' then they aren't doing their jobs.

This Stuff Matters

Any cyclist who pedals for utility will know how important a good route is. Above all other considerations two things make a good route, it must be safe and it must require the minimum of effort.

A flat straight road between two points is the ideal, unfortunately though the same things that make a good route for a cyclist usually make a good route for a driver, so what should be the best route to take is often the most dangerous.

Due to the fact infrastructure planners don't want to be held responsible for killing anyone they take the view that safety is more important than speed and will divert a cyclist along all sorts of indirect routes to keep them off main roads. This also has the benefit of keeping cyclist out of the way of drivers without having to build any actual infrastructure.

When I read the new Strategic Infrastructure Framework for Liverpool I was very interested to see some intention to improve the situation on the Strand.

The Strand is an enormous urban motorway up to 8 lanes wide in some places and with a huge central reservation

According to my father, who knows a bit more about these things than I, the Strand is where the foreshore existed before the building of the docks reclaimed the river to the west. It now cuts off the riverside attractions from the main part of the city, on the riverside you have the Three Graces, the Museum of Liverpool, The Maritime Museum, the Albert Dock and the Echo Arena and convention centre, on the other side lies all the retail, commercial and transport areas.

There are crossing at key points along the road, every couple of hundred metres or so, but a pedestrian has to wait an interminably long time. The plans set out in the SIF primarily want to improve the situation for pedestrians trying to pass from one side to the other, this is to be done by means of pedestrian 'bridges' the analogy being that this urban motorway is in some way comparable to the Thames or the Danube

These are the locations of the bridges

And this gives us a rough idea what one might be like

We'll come back to these images later.

For cyclists there is one crossing shared with pedestrians and one short stretch where there is a bus lane, for any other movements you have to negotiate with traffic. And what a lot of traffic there is, rush hour actually feels like one of the safer times of day because all the motor vehicles are at a stand still and the cyclist has the speed advantage, until you get to the front of the queue and the lights changes and you have dozens of cars urging to get past to reach the next red light.

The DfT has measured the traffic here, the results aren't great for cyclists

45,000 motor vehicles per day, 1,750 of those are HGVs, 1,300 buses, 4,000 vans and just 266 cyclists. It is a hostile place for an unprotected person to exist.

Let's remind ourselves of the Dutch rules about which infrastructure to implement

At over 3,000vph for most of the day this is a definite case for a cycle track.

This is what the SIF says about the developments to the Strand

Like the river bridges of other major cities these interventions will act not merely as crossing points but also as points of orientation, viewing points and meeting places: valuable additions to the city’s infrastructure.

Pedestrian ‘bridges’ will become landmark features in the public realm, allowing people to orientate themselves within their surroundings. These at-grade ‘bridges’ will manifest as major additions to the city’s infrastructure and become key locations for meeting and investment. They will be green where possible, major landscape statements along the corridor, though carefully planned to ensure traffic volume and flows are not compromised.

The crossings will prioritise pedestrian movement, slowing traffic speeds and improving the pedestrian journey into, and across the city.

See that bit at the end of the second paragraph "ensure traffic volume and flows are not compromised". There are only two  possible reasons to say this, 1. The author is crazy.  2.They are lying to keep the motoring lobby happy.

If traffic volume remains as it is there will not be people sitting on a wall relaxing in the middle of the Strand anymore than people go and sit next to the M6 on a Friday evening for a bit of peace and quiet. There will be no people 'viewing' or 'meeting', there will just be the same hostile environment with some prettier pedestrian crossings.

Look again at the artists impressions, a bloke on a bike (with helmet, bien sûr) but no cycle path, enormous green central reservations, but no cycle path. What are we to think? Can it really be true that we are going to have another redevelopment with no infrastructure for cyclists?

To return to the original point, the Strand is a long, straight, flat road that runs from the north of the city to the south, it should be an ideal corridor for cyclists but it isn't, it's a treacherous pain in the arse.

Traffic volumes on the Strand must be compromised to stand any hope of reconnecting the city with the historic waterfront, unfortunately for drivers there is no easy alternative, all the other routes through or around the back of the city already seem to be near capacity at rush hour so the only thing to do is to encourage people to change mode. There is a good north-south rail link and the stations have just been renovated, though I'm sure there are others like me who think that carriages could do with a bit of work to provide extra space for commuters with bicycles, after all, trains don't take you to the office door. There are buses running all over the city, the only mode of transport which is almost completely missing is cycling, and to get people on bikes we need safe, direct, routes that people can feel comfortable using.

Liverpool Strategic Investment Framework

Yes, in typical local authority speak, it's a mouthful, but it's a big name with big ideas that wants to change the look and feel of the city over the next 15 years.

It is the follow-up development plan from Liverpool Vision, the people who brought us the Strategic Regeneration Framework 2001, that plan included Liverpool ONE, the Arena, the re-imagining of Lime St and aiming to be the 2008 European Capital of Culture; so we can be fairly confident that the things Liverpool Vision dreams up have a good chance of being implemented.

Here's the promo video



Launched on 1st November at an event hosted at the Echo Arena the SIF is a new plan to bring a more coherent structure the the recent developments and the city as a whole, you can read the whole plan here. There are fewer of the major set-pieces that the SRF 2001 brought to us, the SIF seems more concerned about improving the overall feel of the city rather than large set-piece building projects and for the most part it looks very hopeful.

If this were a Bond movie what has gone before would be the dramatic pre-credit sequence, the plot and the character exposition are still to come.

Of most interest to us is what this will all mean for cyclists, as I have shown in the past, the opportunity provided by new developments and lots of money can easily be missed if there is a lack of will or imagination. It is vital that with this latest plan the developers understand that no city can consider itself to be a city of the 21st century without building in to its very fabric the most efficient form of transport known to man.

Thanks to Gas2 for this graphic

The SIF doesn't say an awful lot about cycling but it does offer a little encouragement. One of the proposals is called 'Great Streets' and recognises the importance, attractiveness and opportunity available in some of the city centre's largest roads; the Strand, Dale St, Water St, Lime St and Hope St. The SIF says

Improvements to pedestrian and cycle movement along Water Street / Dale Street, to provide a continuous safe and legible route from the Waterfront to Lime Street Station. The street is currently dominated by buses and little else, with the streetscape quality inconsistent. With Princes Dock becoming a point of embarkation and disembarkation for the world’s cruise liners, this will present significant opportunities to invest in the public realm, to generate significant visitor footfall and leverage private sector investment.

Exhibition Road in London is cited as an example of what this might mean, I've not visited Exhibition Road so I'm not exactly sure what this means, but as a shared space there is always the problem of might is right.

The Strand is to be given several pedestrian 'bridges' at key points, the thought being that the Strand is like a river bisecting the city, this is a polite way of putting it. The Strand is a hostile urban motorway with tens of thousands of motor vehicles travelling along it each day most of whom seem to be breaking the speed limit, often by a considerable margin, 50mph in a 30mph zone is commonplace. It cuts off the retail and transport sectors in the centre from the tourist attractions at the riverside. The current situation is, frankly, shameful and embarrassing to think that the hundreds of thousands of tourists visiting the city have to negotiate this route to see some of the city's best sights. The plans for the Strand seem *ahem*, unambitious and I will deal with them in a separate post.

The document returns later to consider walking and cycling as a separate issue.

In terms of connectivity, Liverpool has a legible grid of streets at a scale that is appropriate for walking and cycling around the centre.

However, there are areas of the city that are disconnected and feel ‘cut-off’ from the City Centre’s activity and energy due to the detailed design of street layouts which focus primarily on vehicle movement with walking and cycling considered secondary. Improving the connections for walking and cycling along key strategic routes will help to ‘tie-in’ currently dislocated areas into the city core.

Improving the journey for walking and cycling can involve:
• Appropriate sign posting
• Improved lighting
• High-quality surfaces which show continuation throughout the route
• Improved priority in favour of people walking and cycling, and
• Promotion of the route to the visitor where appropriate.  

They are making some of the right noises but we won't really know until we see the detail of the plans.

Overall I think the general aim of the SIF is admirable and by making it a more livable city it will encourage the investment it seeks. It's now up to us to make sure we aren't fobbed off with unsuitable cycle facilities and in this aim we must be uncompromising, only the highest standards of infrastructure must be allowed. Opportunities have been missed in the past, one again Liverpool is given the opportunity to become a leading 21st century city, one of the best cycling cities in the kingdom, let's hope this time the developers can see which way the tide is turning on the Mersey.

The Lost Soles Campaign

On Wednesday 24th October 529 pairs of shoes were arranged for display on the bandstand in Church St. The number represents the number of people killed or seriously injured on Merseyside's roads in 2011.

Councillor Tim Moore, Cabinet Member for Transport and Climate Change at Liverpool City Council said:

“We are proud to support this campaign and raise awareness of how we should all take responsibility for our safety on the roads. There are many simple steps that we can all take just to ensure our safety, such as making sure you have enough time for your journey; never using your mobile phone while driving and always wearing your seatbelt.”

Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service Watch Manager John Cousins, said:

“We rescue more people from road traffic collisions than fires each year." 

Gill Roberts of the Merseyside Road Safety Officers’ Group, added:

“We want the sentiment of the ‘Lost Soles’ campaign to really bring home the message that we are all responsible for our own and others’ road safety.

“It makes us think that if someone we loved were killed or seriously injured in a road traffic collision, how could their shoes ever be filled? A simple action like driving at an appropriate speed for the traffic or environment you are travelling in can help keep you, your loved ones and other road users safe on our roads.” 

This is who you wish death upon?

To all those people on Twitter and to every impatient driver wishing death and destruction upon cyclists, this is the casualty of your war...

Mrs Lee worked with adults with learning disabilities in Barnet before retiring five years ago.

She volunteered at several organisations including the Samaritans, the Stroke Association and Talking Newspapers.

She had been married to husband Geoff, 67, a retired firefighter, for 42 years. They had two grown-up children and three grandchildren.

Mrs Lee suffered head and chest injuries and was pronounced dead at the scene. 

Anatomy of a Crash

I was knocked off my bike a few weeks ago, ironically I was on my way to the doctor's at the time.

I was cycling along Park Road North in Birkenhead, passing the junction with Park Road West when I was hit by a car emerging from the side road.

View Larger Map

It was raining, the middle of the afternoon in late September, I was wearing a bright blue jacket that contrasted as well with my surroundings as any hi viz product; and I was cycling in secondary position about 1-1.5m from the edge of my lane.

I was merrily cycling along considering the thorny topic of cycle helmets. I approached the side road and maintained my position, I don't recall or didn't notice if the vehicle approaching the junction from my left stopped at the give way line, either way, as I passed it I noticed in my peripheral vision that it was moving out into the road and towards me. It disappeared out of sight behind me as I braced myself in anticipation of the crash that I knew was coming.

About 1 second later the hit came, not particularly hard, just enough to put me off balance enough that it was not recoverable, I was probably only travelling at 12mph up a very slight gradient so as I hit the ground I didn't really slide. My left thigh and elbow took the most impact, my head didn't touch the ground.

My first thought was to check that the car had stopped and wasn't about to continue over the top of me, fortunately he had. next I lay still for a moment and audited my body parts, nothing seemed broken, nothing even hurt particularly except for my elbow which I could tell was cut. I stood up, clothes were ok, nothing ripped particularly badly; how was the bike? Remarkably okay on first impressions, I'd been hit on the back wheel but even this was still perfectly tru, a testament to Andrew at Spa Cycles wheelbuilding skills!

The driver was out of his car and approaching me, he was immediately apologetic, he hadn't seen me; I didn't actually grin at this, but I had to stop myself, properly smidsy'd. He said that he too was a cyclist, I was pretty ambivalent about this, when you are hit by a car it doesn't really matter if the driver is also a cyclist. I wasn't mad at him, I was probably calmer than he

We move to the side of the road, I take pictures there's not even a scratch on his car that I can see, calm down a bit, notice that my left hand brake lever is broken. I'm not in pain but I know I'm going to stiffen up and I need a bandage on my arm. I get the driver's details and eventually leave, I'm only a mile from my GP which is where I was heading, when I get there he bandages my elbow.

Over the next few days bruises start to appear all over me, some from hitting the floor, some from the bike hitting me. Including a whopper of a bruise covering a large part of my thigh, black, blue, purple, and yellow. The pain in my thigh became so great I went to A&E and had to have a couple of days off work. I also realised how lucky I was.

This side road has a very open junction, cars do not approach the main road perpendicular to it with the driver looking to his immediate right, in the last few metres of approach the driver is already turning left, by the time they are at the give way line they are at 45 degrees to the road and must look back almost over their shoulder into their blind spot to see what is approaching.

By my estimation, while the driver was doing this I was already in front of his car and he was looking in completely the wrong direction to see me. While he was looking back over his shoulder he had pulled out and tagged my back wheel and I had gone down. He only hit me quite lightly and if his eyes hadn't returned to looking forward at the right moment he could well have not known he had hit me until he felt the car drive over the top of me.

This is what the driver would have been looking at, a very open view, it's almost not necessary to slow below 20mph if the road is clear,

I think I was perhaps in a blind spot created by his A-pillar as he approached the junction, alternatively he REALLY wasn't paying attention.

There is an awful lot of space on the approach to this junction which doesn't encourage drivers to slow down. Even more crazily this junction is on a corner occupied by a sixth form college

It's not like Wirral Borough Council can even claim ignorance, the next junction along was modified to make the angle car approach it more perpendicular. You can just make out on the left hand side of the junction to Shrewsbury Road where the old kerb used to be and how it has been built out.

This road has many shops, a school, a world renowned park and a medical centre on the other side of the road. I find it difficult to believe these large junctions are either necessary or sensible. The roads were probably laid out 100-150 years ago when Birkenhead was having a heyday and the corporation and the rich men of the age thought broad boulevard type roads around the perimeter of the park were pleasant. Indeed they can be, but they do need redesigning as they encourage poor and sloppy driving, the head of the junction needs narrowing and Park Road West could easily accommodate a segregated cycling path, which would have the dual benefit of providing a place for safe cycling and slowing down the traffic in an area that ought to be safe and pleasant for pedestrians.

How much space do you need?

A letter has appeared in this week's Wirral Globe complaining about cyclists riding on the road rather than the cycle path on the promenade at New Brighton, King's Parade. No particular details are given about the exact location or time of day or the ages or genders of the cyclists. All we know is that there were four or five of them, riding two abreast on the road, traffic had to slow to overtake them and they can be described as 'ignorant'.

King's Parade begins at the location in the map below and heads north east from here, it's a lovely place for a stroll or a ride the only thing that makes it unpleasant is the weight of traffic when it is busy and the speed of traffic when it is quiet.

View Larger Map

It is a section of the North Wirral cycle route and forms a link between two other promenades where there is no motor traffic.

It is a 30 mph dual carriageway boulevard with a promenade alongside the seafront. The part I measured from Google satellite view is approximately 31m wide from seawall to the edge of the inner field. This is divided up, give or take...

• 3m pedestrian path
• 2m cycle path
• 7.5m road
• 2.5m central reservation
• 8m road with an additional 4m wide parking lane
• 4m pavement

Points of note about these dimensions. 

• The 2.5m wide central reservation is unnecessary on a 30mph road.
• Each lane, including the parking lane is 4m wide, this is twice as wide as a car and 1.5m wider than a bus or container wagon.

Look at how dwarfed the car is by the width of the parking lane.

The road is not that heavily trafficed for its size except for on the sunniest days of summer however cars do tend to speed along it, I have seen cars doing 60-70mph when the road is quiet, 40mph is common at all times.

The pavement on the sea wall side of the road is popular with walkers out for a stroll and dog walkers, though they do have a tendency to stray into the cycle lane, and it is popular with families so there can be many small children running around the pavement.

Cars park on both sides of the road, but only the westbound side has an official parking lane, on the eastbound side cars park against the kerb in lane 1.

So firstly, since the cycle path is provided what is it like for a cyclist to use? This varies depending on time of day/year. If it is quiet then it is reasonably adequate, there are no junctions of note to cause you to stop but the surface is made of paving slabs rather than smooth tarmac, you can cruise along at a fair old pace. On a busy day it is much different, children, balls, dogs, inattentive walkers, fishing lines being tossed around, it's a very hazardous place for the cyclist and the other pavement users, consequently great caution must be shown and speeds reduced to below 10mph, sometimes lower, and it's not uncommon to have to come to a halt while an errant child or beast is removed from the cycle lane by its owner. One might also come across other cyclists of varying speeds travelling in either direction on this rather narrow 2m wide lane, again causing you to slow or stop. There is also one platform type area where the cycle lane disappears entirely.

As a result faster riders might think it convenient to use the road rather than the cycle lane, as is their right. The road is broad, direct and has reasonably good visibility, only hampered by the cars parked along it which can range in number from a handful to hundreds.

A cyclist heading eastbound will, if there are no parked cars, occupy the first metre or two of the lane; or if there are parked cars, the space between the car and the dividing line to lane 2. Even riding two abreast they are unlikely to venture in to lane 2. Leaving the entirety of lane 2 to the motor traffic. On the westbound side a cyclist can cycle within the parking lane as it is so broad, at worst they might ride in lane 1 but again lane 2 will always be free. Either way, motorists always have one entire lane to themselves and if they are delayed by cyclists it is almost certainly because the cyclists will be passing parked cars on the westbound carriageway, yet it is the cyclists who get the stick rather than the drivers of the parked cars.

Let us agree with the author of the letter on one thing, that it would be better if the cycles were not using the road, it would also be better if they were not using the pavement and there is clearly enough space to allow this. There is so much space that you could improve the environment for every type of road user without inconveniencing any of them, we have 31m of available space to play with!

The 3m pedestrian space can become 3.5m on the shore side and the lesser used 4m path on the inland side can become 3.5m. Cyclists can have 4m wide dual direction paths on either side of the road. The road can become 2x3m lanes and a 2m parking lane in each direction. The central reservation can be got rid of.

[Edit - for a much better idea than mine see Mark's comment below.]

From my knowledge of the area I think the author's complaint is probably unnecessarily picky, the road is so broad they couldn't have been inconvenienced for more than a few seconds, the cyclists probably had good reason to prefer the road to the cycle lane and it's quite possible that cars being parked on the road was the cause of the cyclists being in the way. In any case for any council wanting to implement some seriously quality cycle infrastructure the vast amounts of space available in this area surely make this a 'gimme' for a showcase facility, it only requires the will and the money. Until then faster riders will continue to use the road and motorists will simply have to put up with it.

Crossing the Rubicon

I have at various time lived and worked in Liverpool and the Wirral and not always on the same side of the river at the same time. For anyone not familiar with the area the River Mersey is a natural barrier between Liverpool and south Lancashire to the north and Wirral and Cheshire to the south. The whole region has been called Merseyside since the 1974 although the term is not universally popular, with many people preferring the historical names of Cheshire and Lancashire.

In any case the river is a great physical (and cultural) divide in the region and various outfits have been offering ways to cross it since 1318, starting with local monks, then local landowners following the dissolution of the monasteries, later still came steam boats in 1815 followed by trains through the newly constructed Mersey Railway Tunnel in 1884. In 1934 the first road tunnel between Birkenhead and Liverpool opened but just 30 years later it was congested enough that work began on another tunnel linking Wallasey and Liverpool, they now carry 95,000 vehicles per day between them.

The intrepid cycling commuter or tourist therefore has, nominally, three means of crossing the river. Let's look at each in more detail...

The Mersey Ferry - The ferry runs most days of the year, at peak time of the day it operates to a Commuter timetable and through the middle of the day to a Cruise timetable. The commuter fare is £2.10 for a single and £2.60 for a return. The ferry leaves each landing stage roughly every 20 minutes in the morning or 30 minutes in the afternoon when it also visits Woodside. To take a bicycle on board is free and very popular, being on the ferry is a nice way to start or end a day's work, there is also a good camaraderie amongst the cycling commuters. The main problem with the ferry is that if you miss it you have a bit of a wait until it comes around again, not particularly convenient.

Merseyrail - Trains run from all across the Wirral in to four stations on a loop line under the city centre. Prices vary but the very minimum fare is Hamilton Square to James St, a distance of less than a mile and taking less than five minutes, but it costs £2.30sin/£2.80ret. Due to the two stations being in different 'zones' none of the weekly or monthly tickets seem to be any cheaper. This was quite annoying for me as I would like to get a good ride in by cycling right all the way to Birkenhead rather than getting the train from one of the nearer stations, and then just get the train to hop across the river and carry on by bicycle again. But there is no monetary saving in doing this. Furthermore there are some physical issues. Some stations only have very small lifts for a couple of people, or you have to carry your bicycle on the escalator, not easy if it's a 27kg Dutch bike! The carriages on the trains are fully seated except for one little spot where two seats have been removed for bicycles of wheelchairs. Unfortunately this spot also has fold down seats which are frequently occupied and I would feel a little silly asking somebody to move so I can put my bike there for one stop.

The only remaining place then is in the area immediately in front of the doors, this is possible, but at the busiest times you might have to wait for another train if there isn't space to get in. Also parking in from of the doors has on at least one occasion led to me being told off by a lady for blocking the exit (although I was getting off at the next stop).

The trains are made up of three carriages, if I had my way I would remove all seating from one of the carriages, this would allow a lot more people and bicycles on.

 The Mersey Tunnels - With regard to cycling through the Mersey tunnels the rules are... 

Bicycles are not permitted through the Kingsway [Wallasey] Tunnel. Through the Queensway [Birkenhead] Tunnel, they are not allowed between the hours of 6:00am to 8:00pm, Monday to Friday, 7:00am to 8:00pm on Saturday and 8:00am to 9:00pm on Sunday. Please note, the time limits during a Sunday are only operational between 1st April and 30th September inclusive.

The mid week time restriction effectively makes cycle commuting through the tunnels impossible for most day workers, I've done it a few times before 6am but it's not a particularly pleasant experience. Head down, go like a bullet and get out as fast as possible. What's most annoying though is that going through the tunnel is toll-free for bicycles making it the only free way of crossing the river. The toll for cars is £1.50 each way making this cheaper than a single on either the train or ferry.

For all commuters each mode has its own disadvantages which ought to make price the deciding variable, but the return price for each, £2.60/£2.80/£3.00 are so close that people probably choose their mode of transport for other reasons. I expect many people with the convenience of a free parking space at their destination will choose to drive. The ferry passengers seem to like the fresh air and a natter. The people on the train are grumpy, in a rush, sleepy, hungover or just plain anti-social.

As a cyclist I would prefer not to have to stop, get off and take a train or ferry then start riding again ten or fifteen minutes later, riding through the tunnel would be preferred if it were safe, but that would require a leap of imagination that I fear is beyond Mersey Tunnels, converting the two outside lanes of the Birkenhead Tunnel into cycle lanes, not something they are about to do to satisfy an unproven level of demand that probably isn't there anyway at the moment.

The second option which should be achievable is reducing the fare between Hamilton Sq and James St to £2 return and making some of the carriages more cycle friendly.

Updated 0700 24/10/12 to add pictures

In Praise of Liverpool City Council (sort of)

Last night I was heading to the Wavertree area of town from the city centre, I used to live in Wavertree when I was a student but I've not been back there walking or cycling in 10 or 12 years. I took the route that I used to stagger walk each day to and from the pub university, it involves going along Myrtle St, across Crown St Park and then down Smithdown Lane.


View Larger Map

Unfortunately I can't remember what Myrtle St used to look like but I think it must have been a typical side road, one lane each way, arrow straight, high kerbs, I got a hell of a surprise when I returned there. Just look at all the Dutchness in these pictures

A 20 mph zone, speed humps, those two are now recognisable on British Streets, but look what else there is, an advanced, protected traffic light for cycles with it's own sequence. A zigzagged road designed to naturally slow vehicles by not being completely straight.

The road leads to a residential area which has no access for cars to the main road on the other side so there is no rat running.

However a bit of filtered permeability later and we have a lovely dedicated cycle path (yes there does seem to be pedestrians walking in it in this photo from Google)

At the top of this path we meet Crown St running perpendicular to us, Crown St used to be busy with fast moving traffic, but LCC has installed quite broad cycle lanes and speed humps along its length. Best of all though is the traffic lights that cross Crown St from the cycle path into the park, ride up to them at a slowish pace and they change automatically so you never have to stop!

So why am I only sort of praising Liverpool City Council?

It's quite simple really, this little 200m stretch of path proves that somebody at LCC knows exactly how to implement the Dutch model, all the major principles are in evidence here.

• Segregation in time and space
• Reduced speed zones
• Traffic calming road design
• Reducing traffic through restricted access
• Maintaining momentum and allowing cyclists to go the shortest most direct route while sending cars the long way and reducing their priority in the hierarchy.

So the simple question is if they can do it here, why not everywhere else?

It is also interesting that this is the only place in the city I have found with this standard of infrastructure, between the university and the residential area with the largest student population, it's as though the Council think only students want to cycle. Generally speaking they don't have kids, probably don't carry a lot of equipment or huge amounts of shopping and have fairly restricted travel needs. The mindset at the council must be that people with slightly greater needs or money than students won't want to cycle, if you have kids for example, but of course if you have kids and want to cycle segregated facilities are even more important.

Liverpool is not exactly a rich city either with some of the most deprived wards in the country, it's not just students who are too poor to drive. The poorest areas are in the north of the city, Bootle and Walton yet these are the areas with some of the worst cycling facilities. Meanwhile the leafy south of the city seems to have a few more cycle lanes. It was noticeable too that at the Liverpool Cycle Forum meetings most of the participants lived in the south of the city and were perhaps better educated and more affluent than the city average.

But what about the poor people in the north? Without decent cycle facilities many will be forced to scrape together just enough money to keep a car on the road, reducing the money they have to spend on other necessities and comforts, if they could cycle they may have more money to spend in their local areas rather than it going to multinational corporations, people on bicycles shop in their areas and spend more money in their towns, this is why cycling infrastructure is a good investment.

A Bicycle for a Lady

I've been trying to persuade Miss Bicycles to start riding for a while now, although she has always insisted I will have to supply the bike. Last week I spotted something interesting on ebay, an old Peugeot mixte

What interested me most was that the photos were poor quality and the bike looked pretty rough so I guessed the bidding would be low, but there seemed to be nothing fundamentally wrong with it.

My guess turned out to be correct and I won it for £34, the next day and a £10 train journey later and I had it home...

The stem was seized at a funny angle, that was a bit of a bugger, as it was an odd 7mm allen key, which I didn't have amongst my tools but I found one in the workshop at work and set it right.

The chain had seen better days and the clearcoat was flaking

All the alloy is quite tarnished

Mudguards very tarnished

The rear wheel was tarnished, once I got the tyre off it saw that it had rotted through and had to be replaced

Leaves and cobwebs, the bike had spent some time in a barn.

Bars were tarnished and I never think drop bars suit a mixte.

Some heavy pitting on the chrome, that isn't all going to come out

Rather more money than I had hoped and several hours of elbow grease later and she is looking quite fine

I replaced, handlebars, brake levers, grips, cables and housings, chain, tyre and tubes, rear wheel and saddle and added a bell.

All the alloy was cleaned by scrubbing with aluminium kitchen foil and water.

A lot of it came up very shiny

I went for some nice swept handlebars and gumwall Schwalbe Delta Cruisers which I have on my Gazelle and have been very reliable.

I handed it over last night, first impressions were good, we'll take it out over the weekend and see how it rides.

Lambeth Bridge Northern Roundabout

My response to the proposals

I have been reading the proposals for the Northern Roundabout at Lambeth Bridge and I wish it to be noted that I disagree with the fundamental principles of this redesign, namely that cyclists should either be mixing with heavy traffic or mixing with pedestrians. This is not an acceptable choice, providing proper segregated cycle lanes is the only rational choice at a roundabout as busy as this. Leaving cyclists on the road will inevitably mean someone will be killed here and the persons responsible for this design will be responsible for that death as they have the chance right now to prevent it.

Alternatively, putting cyclists onto shared used footways creates a conflict with pedestrians that will be the precursor to a thousand comments on the internet about ‘speeding cyclists’ ‘almost ran over my 80 year old grandma’. Pedestrians do not want cyclists on the pavement, motorists do not want cyclists on the roads, cyclists do not want to be on either, provide segregated cycle lanes and everybody wins.

PS. the design doesn’t make clear how you expect cyclists to get from the carriageway onto the shared use path, is it by entering the raised pedestrian crossing and then tuning on to the pavement and passing against the flow through the crowd of people waiting to cross the road?

A24 London Road Consultation

My response to the proposals

Regarding the proposals for London Road, I refer you to David Hembrow’s article http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2012/03/who-do-we-campaign-for.html  explaining why the ‘dual network’ approach is unsuitable and more space consuming than simply putting in one cycle network of such high quality that it is suitable for everyone rather than two networks which are suitable for nobody.

Pedestrians are hostile to cyclists on the pavement, motorists are hostile, to the point of deadly violence, towards cyclists on the road, cyclists don’t want to be slowed down by mixing with pedestrians or intimidated by mixing with motor vehicles. The only satisfactory solution is to create a cycle path segregated from both pedestrians and vehicles, built to the standards set by the Dutch with features such as priority over side roads, a continuous unbroken route just as any road should be and its own traffic light sequence. 

Roadsafe for Liverpool?

This morning I had a rather close encounter. I was riding along my normal route to work, dead straight 30mph 4-laned road, lights on as it was still a bit murky, when I was passed by a Transit van at a distance of about 1ft.

Now, I'm a pretty experienced cyclist, I cycle in cities every day, I'm pretty fearless and I'll stand my ground against most things, I can't even remember the last time I was actually scared on a bike, not even when I was hit by a car recently, but this guy was so close at about 30-35mph that I flinched. It was really not on.

Down in the big smoke those metropolitan types have a scheme called Roadsafe which is used by some cyclists to highlight to the police instances of poor or dangerous driving. I know we don't have one on Merseyside, but I thought I would try reporting the incident anyway to see what happened.

I sent an email at about 0745, had a call from a constable at about 1030 and another about 1115. He regretted that a prosecution was unlikely as it would be my word against the driver's, this was my expectation, he also brought up headcams and that a couple of his colleagues use them (get in touch if you read this!) I have my own reservations about them though. I do 'enjoy' watching the videos that get posted on Youtube but I have two issues with buying one for myself

1. I begrudge having to spend that sort of money to try and catch bad drivers myself.
2. I believe, for me at least, it might present a type of moral hazard where there would be an element of looking for trouble to justify the purchase.

The constable spoke to his colleagues in traffic about any Roadsafe type scheme, they don't have one but got the impression there some consideration that it might be a good idea. In any case the constable said he had a name and address of a registered keeper and he would attempt to contact them, result! That is really all I wanted and never expected to go from email to that result in just a couple of hours, so thanks Merseyside Police.

Thank *^&$ I don't live in Boston

A couple of well known bloggers, Bikeyface and Lovely Bicycle, live that way and in a circuitous way I got to this...

Bicycling Rules of the Road according to the Boston Public Health Commission

• Ride with traffic, not against it. Ride as far to the right as possible.
• Use appropriate hand signals.
• Respect traffic signals. Stop at all stop signs and red lights.
• Stop and look left, right and left again before entering a street.
• Look back and yield to traffic coming from behind before turning left at intersections.
• Don’t ride when it’s dark. If riding at dusk, dawn or in the evening is unavoidable, wear retroreflective material on clothing or bike, and use lights on the bike.
• Cyclists should be restricted to sidewalks and paths until they reach the age of 10 and can demonstrate they know the rules of the road. Supervision is essential until children develop the necessary traffic skills and judgment.

The BPHC is fantastically interested in cycling, there is page after page of information telling people to wear helmets and how to choose the correct fit. Bizarrely though, for a public health group I can't find a single page telling the readers that cycling is more likely to save their life and that perhaps it might be a good idea if they take it up.

In fact with their new campaign one might even think they are trying to discourage cycling. This image is particularly fantastic, what sort of helmet was this man with a bloody jaw supposed to wear to save him from his injury, a full motorcycle helmet? It couldn't be more off putting if the caption said 'Still think it's a good idea to cycle?'

I really don't want to turn this into a swear blog, but what a load of counts.

Hatton Garden Suicide Lane gets more Suicidal

A few months ago I wrote about the Hatton Garden Suicide Lane. This is a contraflow cycle lane that terminates at a point where you have cars and vans coming head on around a bend at 30-40mph.

Riding down it last night for the first time in a while I was shocked to discover that things have got much worse while some roadworks are being conducted.

The roadworks now force the oncoming vehicles to drive straight towards you in the mandatory contraflow cycle lane

I've sent some questions to Liverpool City Council, I await their reply with interest...

• Who is responsible for permitting this arrangement?
• Was a risk assessment undertaken, if so, may I have a copy?
• What was done to mitigate the increased risk to cyclists?
• Was there a consultation of stakeholders, if so, who was included?

Update 15/10/12 - A reply from the council

I have received a response from Northwest gas alliance who are carrying out the work

The temporary traffic regulation order was granted by the City Council on Friday afternoon to suspend the cycle lane.  Cycle lane closed signs were to be in place on Saturday morning

Marvellous, except the assuming they mean this Friday the 12th the roadworks began at least two days before the TRO was granted and I rode down Hatton Garden on my way to town this afternoon after work

No signs at the top of the street

Still no signs further down.

They must be having real problems finding those 'Cyclist Dismount' signs at the back of the storeroom, this deathtrap has been allowed to remain for five days.

I replied again...

Thanks for the info. I was cycling along Hatton Garden again yesterday morning and this afternoon, as you can see from the attached photographs, no signs are in place at the top of the road or closer to the obstruction. That means this hazard has been in place and unsigned for a minimum of five days.

It is also disappointing that when faced with this situation the course of action decided upon is to simply close the cycle lane. Considering the obstruction is in the road and not the cycle lane, the obvious solution is to close the road and leave the cycle lane open.

I dare say in a city where cycling has a modal share of probably <1% that last comment will either result in jaws hitting the floor or hysteria, I can even imagine now what the response is, closing the cycle lane inconveniences fewer people. However, I want them to know that this is how people are beginning to think, a year or eighteen months ago I wouldn't have even thought about it, now, I want answers.


Update 17/10/12 -

The decision to suspend the cycle lane along Hatton Garden was a joint decision taken between the contractor, Enterprise Liverpool and Liverpool City Council. Due to the extents of the works along Hatton Garden, it was necessary to suspend this cycle lane as vehicles where travelling in the cycle lane when negotiating around the works on site. As you may be aware it is an offence for any vehicle to drive within a mandatory cycle lane as they can be issued with a fixed penalty notice.

A cycle lane is no different from a bus lane where as if works need to be undertaken on site, then in order to minimise disruption on the highway network, the City Council will suspend such a lane and allow vehicles to travel in these lanes. Your suggestion of closing Hatton Gardens for vehicles but keep the cycle lane open is not viable due to the amount of vehicles that use this route compared to cyclists.

The cycle lane in this area will be suspended until the 4^th November. I will ensure that the contractor erects signs on site stating that the cycle lane is closed for the duration of these works.

I hope the above explains the City Councils thoughts and actions at this time. Please contact me direct if you require any further information.

As expected then, closing the cycle lane inconveniences fewer people. As for the signs, well, I went past again tonight, there are no signs saying the cycle lane is closed, the two signs opposite the roadworks have had plastic bags put over them, but a sign with a bag over it can mean anything, how would anyone not familiar with the road know that it is a cycle lane sign that has been covered over? Also, the sign at the top of the street is still uncovered. It's turning into a bit of a farse, Enterprise Liverpool can't even scrape together a couple of cycle lane closed signs or even a 'cyclists dismount' sign. An entire week now that this lethal hazard has been allowed to exist.

Update 22/10/12 - The saga continues, I was back to Hatton Garden again today, the first time in a week, it seems the promise of proper signage was merely empty words, what we have here are cycle lanes signs that have had the plastic bags taken off them and grey paint daubed across them. I do hope they have checked the paint comes off and haven't just destroyed public property.

The problem remains of course, if a sign has had paint smeared across it, how do you know what it was telling you and therefore what is now not permitted. At the top of the road you pass a sign that says this is a cycle lane, you then pass no other legible signs to tell you that the cycle lane has been suspended.

Update 24/10/12 - I have emailed again to Liverpool City Council and also to my local councillor.

I was passing Hatton Garden again on Monday evening, unfortunately the contractors do not seem to have erected any signage to suggest the cycle lane is suspended. The sign at the top of the road is still as normal, the signs opposite the road works have been painted over as you can see in the attached image. I’m sure you will agree that the logic behind painting over a sign is flawed, because unless the passer by knows what the sign was before it was painted over they will not know what it is saying is now not permitted and even if they do know what was there beforehand a painted over sign is not a typical means of conveying information. Anyone unfamiliar with the road would be in an even worse position, they could easily continue along it believing they had right of way in the cycle lane and ride themselves in to an extremely hazardous, potentially life threatening position. It has been twelve days since I highlighted this issue, at least 13 days since the road works started and 12 days since the TRO was granted.

I would also appreciate it if you could send me a copy of the TRO or at least let me know from where I can get a copy.

Liverpool Cycle Forum

The minutes of the latest Liverpool Cycle Forum meeting can be found here.

An additional meeting will be held on November 14th with the Shadow minister for Transport, Maria Eagle present.

Oxford St, London meet Church St, Liverpool

Yesterday, the ever popular #Freewheeler made an excellent post regarding Oxford St in London being rather full of motorised traffic. What struck me of course was that he ended it

If you want to know how Oxford Street could be civilised, go to somewhere like Nice. Or even Liverpool.

It took me a while to figure out where the civilised part of Liverpool might be found, it was even more remarkable when I realised he probably meant the pavement in front of Primark!

Strangely though he is probably right. Take a look at this photo of Church St in the 1920s

The delightful old-timey charm, the hustle and bustle of the pavements the trams, almost New York like, remarkable to think this is a scene my grandparents would have recognised.

It is entirely reasonable to think that today it should look something like this...

...like Oxford St.

Yet the truth is that at some point further back than I can remember, probably in the 60s or 70s when the motorcar was really becoming hegemonic, some bright spark bravely countered that wave of hegemony by making Church St a pedestrian area and today it looks like this...

It's full of shops and people and buskers and street dancers and artists and Christmas markets. Nobody would ever dream of turning this back into a road, yet local authorities seem so scared of turning roads into pedestrian areas. All it requires is a little vision and bravery, some people will grumble for while, but soon enough people won't be able to imagine it any other way and the idea of giving it over to cars will seem absurd.

It makes me wonder why smaller towns and villages are so worried about limiting access by car and limiting parking, when in my experience it seems to be at worst a neutral act and often a beneficial one. The nearest car parks to Church Street are each 250-300m away, probably far further than a car park would be relative to a pedestrianised small town or village. The minor extra inconvenience of getting there is counteracted by the pleasure of being there.

*Riding bicycles permitted in the pedestrianised area before 10am and after 4pm, grumble, grumble.