In a week where the government has proudly said it will fund £13m for bikeability training in a press release that as usual just drones on about cycling being a good thing I am still looking at tumbleweeds rolling past on design guidance.
For a rounded rant about the lack of funding for cycling infrastructure, have a read of Karen Gee of Cycle Sprog‘s blog post on the press release which I wholeheartedly endorse. However, there is something else missing that only geeks like me tend to worry about and that’s the guidance to help what little money appears for infrastructure to be invested properly.
I have been trawling through lots of walking and cycling design guidance for my day job recently and it’s apparent that the UK isn’t short on help, the problem is that much of it is an abject mess. There are good documents to be had, but it’s almost an industry of redesigning the wheel which we really could do without. The significant issue we have is the usual government position of expecting this stuff to fall to localism. One of the key Dutch principles is to make layouts legible and this requires a level of consistency. It doesn’t mean everything looks identical, it means it should read the same.
It’s a far cry from how we run our motorways and trunk roads (at least from a design point of view) because the groundbreaking (for the UK) Interim Advice Note 195/16 “Cycle traffic and the strategic road network”, has now been fully Incorporated into the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges as CD195 “Designing for cycle traffic”.
The Ranty Highwayman: Where is Chapter 6?
In a week where the government has proudly said it will fund £13m for bikeability training in a press release that as usual just drones on about cycling being a good thing I am still looking at tumbleweeds rolling past on design guidance. For a rounded rant about the lack of funding for cycling infrastructure,… [Read More]
