A2 Blackheath - road will be narrowed and a grass shared-use path put in

There is a debate on the Lewisham cyclists list at the moment.
There are plans by Transport for London to narrow the carriageway of the
A2 crossing Blackheath, as the "guardians of the heath" wish to cut down
the area of the heath encroached on by the road. The plan is a very narrow
carriageway, a 7.2 metre wide carriageway.
Separate from that will be a 2metre shared use path, covered with grass.

Dangerous on two points - cyclists squeezed off the road,
then being asked to ride on a grass surface shared with toddlers and
babies in prams. This is a major commuter route in London.



Also in the discussion, could someone please give me the Department for
Transport figures which say that off-road paths are more dangerous than
cycling on the road? I know this has been discussed here.

John Hearns wrote:
There is a debate on the Lewisham cyclists list at the moment.
There are plans by Transport for London to narrow the carriageway of
the A2 crossing Blackheath, as the "guardians of the heath" wish to
cut down the area of the heath encroached on by the road. The plan is
a very narrow carriageway, a 7.2 metre wide carriageway.
Separate from that will be a 2metre shared use path, covered with
grass.

Dangerous on two points - cyclists squeezed off the road,
then being asked to ride on a grass surface shared with toddlers and
babies in prams. This is a major commuter route in London.

What kind of idiot would design a grass-covered cycle path? It'd be a
mudbath following the first rainfall!

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:05:34 +0000, Simon Bennett wrote:


What kind of idiot would design a grass-covered cycle path? It'd be a
mudbath following the first rainfall!


It has been discussed as part of the CRISP process.
A pedesrian/cycleway composed of submerged pre-cast concrete hard standing
blocks.


BTW, if anyone wants to have some input into this, it is on the agenda at
the Lewisham Cyclist meeting tonight.
http://www.lewishamcyclists.net/imag...ngs/MarMM.html

John Hearns wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:05:34 +0000, Simon Bennett wrote:


What kind of idiot would design a grass-covered cycle path? It'd be a
mudbath following the first rainfall!


It has been discussed as part of the CRISP process.
A pedesrian/cycleway composed of submerged pre-cast concrete hard standing
blocks.


BTW, if anyone wants to have some input into this, it is on the agenda at
the Lewisham Cyclist meeting tonight.
http://www.lewishamcyclists.net/imag...ngs/MarMM.html

John

Are there plan details online anywhere? Can you provide some evidence
that the design is really talking about a grassed path. This is not my
understanding from the correspondence that Roger has been posting to
the LC list but I admit I am not fully clear on the plans. I am
unlikely to be able to make the meeting tonight

best wishes
james

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 01:50:22 -0800, wrote:



John

Are there plan details online anywhere? Can you provide some evidence
that the design is really talking about a grassed path. This is not my
understanding from the correspondence that Roger has been posting to the
LC list but I admit I am not fully clear on the plans.

My wording was a direct quote from the Word document which David Mill sent
to the group on Saturday 11th March. It is his response to the discussions
of the CRISP meeting.

I should make it clear that the grass covering is not TfLs policy.

John Hearns wrote:
There is a debate on the Lewisham cyclists list at the moment.
There are plans by Transport for London to narrow the carriageway of the
A2 crossing Blackheath, as the "guardians of the heath" wish to cut down
the area of the heath encroached on by the road. The plan is a very narrow
carriageway, a 7.2 metre wide carriageway.
Separate from that will be a 2metre shared use path, covered with grass.

Dangerous on two points - cyclists squeezed off the road,
then being asked to ride on a grass surface shared with toddlers and
babies in prams. This is a major commuter route in London.

This is awful.
How wide is the road now?
What's the speed limit?
Is it LCN+?

2.0 metres is described as 'absolute minimum width' for a shared path
in the London Cycling Design Standards - it should be 3.0m unless
there's a very good reason (e.g. to get between two houses or across a
n existing narrow bridge).

The guardians of the heath should be persuaded that their only options
are 3.0m of tarmac on the heath or leaving the carriageway width at
9.0 to 9.5m. Probably it would be a mistake to ask for a wider
carriageway, or someone will try to squeeze in a bus lane.

Reducing the speed limit to 30, if it's more now, would improve the
heath by reducing traffic noise, and would encourage cyclists onto the
road.

Colin McKenzie

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:41:18 +0000, Colin McKenzie wrote:


This is awful.
Yup.
How wide is the road now?
Two lanes, plus a painted-on cycle lane either side. I think 9 metres or
more.

What's the speed limit?
30 mph
Is it LCN+?
Good question - I think so. There was a CRISP meeting last week.

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:30:09 +0000, John Hearns
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:05:34 +0000, Simon Bennett wrote:


What kind of idiot would design a grass-covered cycle path? It'd be a
mudbath following the first rainfall!


It has been discussed as part of the CRISP process.
A pedesrian/cycleway composed of submerged pre-cast concrete hard standing
blocks.


BTW, if anyone wants to have some input into this, it is on the agenda at
the Lewisham Cyclist meeting tonight.
http://www.lewishamcyclists.net/imag...ngs/MarMM.html

Are these the things that have soil-filled through holes in 'em to
allow grass to grow within, such as:

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/492...yby1jpg4lo.jpg

If so, it's an utterly ****e idea. I've ridden on such blocks - the
vibration is appalling. Proposing these things as a surface for
utility cycling is an act of weapons-grade idiocy.

Anything other than an MTB with lowish-pressure 2.1" tyres would be
insufferable on such a surface.

A commuter on 27mm slicks or less would be endangering their rims
unless they proceed at a walking pace.

Tim Binns wrote:

Are these the things that have soil-filled through holes in 'em to
allow grass to grow within, such as:

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/492...yby1jpg4lo.jpg

If so, it's an utterly ****e idea. I've ridden on such blocks - the
vibration is appalling. Proposing these things as a surface for
utility cycling is an act of weapons-grade idiocy.

Anything other than an MTB with lowish-pressure 2.1" tyres would be
insufferable on such a surface.

A commuter on 27mm slicks or less would be endangering their rims
unless they proceed at a walking pace.

They have them on the cyclepath across the end of Rutland Water dam and
they are bad. Bad on a mountain bike, as you say, even worse on a
commuter bike and sheer hell I would think on a Brompton.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

John Hearns wrote:

There is a debate on the Lewisham cyclists list at the moment.
There are plans by Transport for London to narrow the carriageway of the
A2 crossing Blackheath, as the "guardians of the heath" wish to cut down
the area of the heath encroached on by the road. The plan is a very narrow
carriageway, a 7.2 metre wide carriageway.
Separate from that will be a 2metre shared use path, covered with grass.

Dangerous on two points - cyclists squeezed off the road,
then being asked to ride on a grass surface shared with toddlers and
babies in prams. This is a major commuter route in London.

Ride on the road then! A grass path is a bad joke.