The A30.
This road here:
:Essentially the cyclist was removed from a dual carriageway with hard shoulder, to a dual carriageway without hard shoulder, for his safety. It would be mad to cycle in either of these places, but if I had to pick one, I know where I would prefer to cycle.
Surprisingly, its not difficult to find some examples of cycling infrastructure on these type of roads:
Why is it that cycling is accommodated on these sorts of roads at all? I assume providing this sort of infrastructure is a box ticking exercise. Unless there is a Cycling on Dual Carriageways pressure group which would appear to have more success than the #space4cycling campaign. The fact that this infrastructure even exists suggests that Space for Cycling isn't just needed in the urban area, but it needs to link them too.
Those roads that are officially motorways are supposed to have an alternate route for cyclists and pedestrians, so where would the alternate path for the M25 be? Also, if i was an MP, I would have a bill introduced to have the speed limit for the motorways (and only motorways, not dual carriageways) raised to 80 mph/130 km/h, so that A there is a reasonable speed for motorways, the Netherlands also has a 130 km/h limit, a more reasonable speed for a road like the M25, and to entice the DfT to build good quality cycle infrastructure so the limit can be raised.
ReplyDeleteAnd to be clear, that cycle infrastructure must be a completely separated cycle path at least 100 metres away from the motorway or dual carriageway.
Delete